Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 43 references

A Deep Dive Into the Tangent Category of Schemes

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The category of schemes over a fixed base is a tangent category—tangent spaces are relative spectra of symmetric algebras of Kähler differentials—and quasi-separated schemes are determined up to isomorphism by their differential-bundle…

desk verdict A genuinely useful expository bridge between tangent categories and scheme theory, with two modest new corollaries, but the main tangent-category theorem has a real gluing gap that needs to be fixed before the paper can be fully trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.06855 v1 pith:MHAQ42TE submitted 2026-08-07 math.AG math.CTmath.DG

Geoff Vooys This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AGmath.CTmath.DG MSC 14-0218-0214A9914B1018F4018F99
keywords tangentcategoryschemesrelativeschemeKählerdifferentialsdifferentialbundlesquasi-coherentsheavesquasi-separatedreconstructiontheorem
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper establishes that the category of schemes over a base scheme $S$ is a tangent category, a categorical setting in which the tangent bundle and differentiation can be treated abstractly. The tangent scheme of an $S$-scheme $X$ is built as $T_{X/S}=\operatorname{Spec}_X(\operatorname{Sym}_{\mathcal{O}_X}(\Omega_{X/S}))$: take the sheaf of Kähler differentials, form its symmetric algebra, and apply the relative spectrum over $X$. The paper shows the tangent-category axioms hold by verifying them on affine opens and gluing through Zariski descent. It closes with a reconstruction theorem: for quasi-separated schemes, an equivalence of categories of differential bundles $\mathbf{DBun}(X)\simeq\mathbf{DBun}(Y)$ occurs exactly when $X\cong Y$, so the bundle category determines the scheme. This matters because it transfers the differential-geometric technology of tangent categories into scheme theory, with quasi-coherent sheaves playing the role that vector bundles play for manifolds.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing construction is the relative tangent scheme $T_{X/S}=\operatorname{Spec}_X(\operatorname{Sym}_{\mathcal{O}_X}(\Omega_{X/S}))$: take the sheaf of Kähler differentials of $X$ over $S$, form its symmetric algebra as a quasi-coherent sheaf of $\mathcal{O}_X$-algebras, and apply the relative spectrum functor, which sends a quasi-coherent sheaf of algebras on $X$ to a scheme affine over $X$. The cocommutative Hopf algebra structure on the symmetric algebra supplies the addition of tangent vectors, while the gluing argument—checking axioms on affine opens and assembling them by Zariski descent—turns a local algebra construction into a global tangent category. For the reconstruction theorem, the key mechanism is the cited equivalence $\mathbf{DBun}(X)^{\mathrm{op}}\simeq\mathbf{QCoh}(X)$, together with the classical theorem that quasi-coherent sheaves determine a quasi-separated scheme.

What would settle it

Compute the equalizer in Definition 5.1.1(6) directly on a non-affine glued scheme, for instance $\mathbb{P}^1$ covered by two affine lines; if the affine-local equalizer diagrams do not assemble into a global equalizer, Theorem 5.2.16 fails. A second test is to search for two non-isomorphic quasi-separated schemes with an equivalence of differential-bundle categories; any such pair would refute Theorem 6.1.17.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central assertion is that the category of schemes over a base scheme $S$ is a tangent category, with tangent functor $T_{(-)/S}$ defined by $T_{X/S}=\operatorname{Spec}_X(\operatorname{Sym}_{\mathcal{O}_X}(\Omega_{X/S}))$. The proof works affine-locally: on affine opens this is the dual-numbers tangent structure on commutative algebras, and the paper shows how the projection, zero section, addition, vertical lift, and canonical flip glue along the relative spectrum and Zariski descent. The second assertion is that for quasi-separated schemes $X$ and $Y$, $X\cong Y$ if and only if $\mathbf{DBun}(X)\simeq\mathbf{DBun}(Y)$. The forward direction is immediate from functoriality; the reverse direction passes through a cited equivalence between differential bundles and the opposite of quasi-coherent sheaves, together with the classical reconstruction of a quasi-separated scheme from its category of quasi-coherent sheaves.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the two cited results the paper does not prove—the identification of differential bundles with opposite quasi-coherent sheaves, and the reconstruction of quasi-separated schemes from quasi-coherent sheaves—hold at the stated level of generality; the tangent-category half also assumes the affine-local verification of the axioms glues, especially for the equalizer condition.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For every $S$-scheme $X$, the tangent scheme $T_{X/S}$ is an internal abelian group over $X$, and all the tangent structure maps are affine.
  • The tangent functor is representable: maps $X\times_S S[\varepsilon]\to Y$ are the same as maps $X\to T_{Y/S}$, so infinitesimal paths probe tangent vectors.
  • Quasi-separated schemes are rigid under differential-bundle equivalence: an equivalence $\mathbf{DBun}(X)\simeq\mathbf{DBun}(Y)$ forces an isomorphism $X\cong Y$.
  • For quasi-separated $X$, the equality $\mathbf{DBun}_{\mathbf{qsSch}}(X)=\mathbf{DBun}_{\mathbf{Sch}}(X)$ means the reconstruction invariant is computed inside the full tangent category without extra finiteness hidden in the definition of a bundle.
  • Slice tangent structures on $\mathbf{Sch}_{/X}$ assemble pseudofunctorially as the base scheme varies, giving a coherent family of tangent categories parameterized by schemes.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The reconstruction theorem is essentially a translation of two external results; if those results are later extended beyond quasi-separated schemes, the same proof would transfer the differential-bundle invariant to any class of schemes where quasi-coherent sheaves remain a complete invariant.
  • The author leaves the dual tangent structure on the opposite category as future work; a concrete next test is whether differential bundles there reproduce quasi-coherent sheaves directly, and whether the absence of general pushouts in $\mathbf{Sch}_{/S}$ obstructs the construction.
  • Since the equality of differential-bundle categories over quasi-separated schemes is proved from the affineness of bundle projections, one can expect analogous full tangent-subcategory inclusions for other classes closed under affine bundles and tangent powers, such as separated or quasi-compact quasi-separated schemes.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Formalized claims in Lean

  1. Claim #1: The paper's central assertion is that the category of schemes over a base scheme $S$ is a tangent category, with tangent functor $T_{(-)/S}$ defined by $T_{X/S}=\operatorname{Spec}_X(\operatorname{Sym}_{\mathcal{O}_X}(\Omega_{X/S}))$. The proof works affine-locally: on affine opens this is the dual-numbers tangent structure on commutative algebras, and the paper shows how the projection, zero sect

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops, in a largely expository style, the tangent structure on the category Sch/S whose tangent functor is T_{X/S} = Spec_X(Sym_{O_X}(Ω_{X/S})), the relative tangent scheme of Grothendieck. It builds up the needed apparatus in commutative algebra and quasi-coherent sheaves: fibrations of algebras and modules, relative symmetric algebras, the relative spectrum functor, and Kähler differentials. The central result is Theorem 5.2.16, asserting that Sch/S is a tangent category with the stated p, 0, add, ℓ, and c. The paper then constructs a dual tangent structure on the opposite category and, in Section 6, proves that for quasi-separated schemes X and Y there is an equivalence DBun(X) ≃ DBun(Y) if and only if X ≅ Y, using [CL23] and the Gabriel-Rosenberg reconstruction theorem.

Significance. If the central tangent-category theorem is fully established, the paper provides a useful and explicit bridge between tangent category theory and scheme theory, spelling out how the affine model of Example 5.1.13 glues to arbitrary relative schemes. The fibrational and pseudofunctorial perspective on symmetric algebras and the relative spectrum is presented carefully and is likely to be helpful to readers in both communities. The reconstruction theorem, as the paper itself acknowledges, is essentially a folklore consequence of the external results [CL23] and Gabriel-Rosenberg; its value here is organizational rather than as a new geometric invariant. The affine case and the formal dual tangent structure via [CC14, Proposition 5.17] are convincing, and the paper is honest about which ingredients are imported. The main weaknesses are proof gaps in the global descent steps, not questionable mathematical assertions.

major comments (3)
  1. [§5.2, Theorem 5.2.16, item (6)] The proof of the equalizer condition in Definition 5.1.1(6) is not complete. The text says that because every morphism involved is affine, it suffices to check the equalizer affine-locally over X and then glue. Universal properties in Sch/S are not local in this way: to show that the displayed diagram is an equalizer one must prove a factorization property for arbitrary test schemes, and no descent or gluing lemma for equalizers of affine X-schemes is stated or proved. This is not a cosmetic issue; footnote 27 concedes that Sch/S fails to admit general pushouts and coequalizers, so the gluing step cannot be treated as automatic. The same pattern is used for items (3)–(5), but the equalizer is the sharpest case because it involves a genuine universal property. This missing argument is load-bearing, since Section 6 and the differential-bundle results presuppose the full tangent structure of Theorem 5.2.16.
  2. [§6.1, Theorem 6.1.17 and Corollary 6.1.16] The reconstruction theorem depends on two external results whose precise hypotheses are not quoted in the manuscript: [CL23, Theorem 4.27] and the Gabriel-Rosenberg theorem as stated in Theorem 6.1.1. Corollary 6.1.16 claims DBun(X) ≃ QCoh(X)^op for every quasi-separated S-scheme, and Theorem 6.1.17 applies to quasi-separated schemes, but the original sources may require additional finiteness conditions. For example, one should check whether the equivalence of [CL23] holds for a disjoint union of infinitely many copies of Spec k, which is quasi-separated but not quasi-compact. Please state the exact hypotheses of the imported theorems and either prove the needed consequences or restrict the statements to the class for which the cited results are valid. As written, the chain of equivalences in Theorem 6.1.17 is valid only if the cited theorems apply verbatim to the stated class.
  3. [§5.2, Proposition 5.2.3] The proof of the adjunction (−)×_S W_S ⊣ T_{(−)/S} is carried out by choosing affine open covers and then asserting that the local data glue. It does not verify that the local adjunction bijections agree on double overlaps, nor that the resulting map X → T_{Y/S} is independent of the chosen covers. This matters because Corollary 5.2.4, which uses this adjunction to conclude that T is continuous, is used in item (1) of the proof of Theorem 5.2.16, and Proposition 5.3.1 also uses the adjunction. The gap is likely repairable by writing out the compatibility diagrams, but as stated the proof is a sketch rather than a complete verification.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract] There are typos in the abstract: 'bifibration' appears as 'bfibration' and 'quasi-coherent' appears as 'quesicoherent'.
  2. [References and proof of Theorem 6.1.17] The numbering of the external result from [CL23] is inconsistent: the proof of Theorem 6.1.17 cites [CL23, Theorem 4.27], while the introduction cites [CL23, Theorem 4.28] for the same equivalence; please make the citation consistent.
  3. [§2.2, proof of Proposition 2.2.4] The proof says 'as in Proposition 2.2.4' when referring to the preceding monadicity argument; this should refer to Proposition 2.1.6.
  4. [§5.2, Definition 5.2.2 and Theorem 5.2.16] The notation T_{X/S} for the tangent scheme and T^n X/S for the nth iterated wide pullback is easy to confuse; please add a sentence that fixes the notation explicitly before Definition 5.2.2.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the reconstruction theorem is an explicit composition of independent external theorems, and the tangent-structure proof gap is a missing argument, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The central claims do not reduce to their inputs by construction. Definition 5.2.2 sets T_{X/S} = Spec_X(Sym_{O_X}(Ω_{X/S})); the affine tangent structure of Example 5.1.13 is imported from [CC14]/[CL23]/[CV25], but Theorem 5.2.16 attempts an axiom-by-axiom verification rather than assuming the global structure. Its treatment of axiom 5.1.1(6) is a genuine gap: the paper says 'because every map in sight is affine it suffices to prove that the diagram is an equalizer affine-locally over X and glue,' yet no gluing lemma for equalizers is supplied, and footnote 27 concedes that Sch/S lacks pushouts and coequalizers in general. That is an unsupported reduction, but it is a correctness risk, not circularity: the conclusion is asserted, not presupposed. For Theorem 6.1.17, the proof explicitly reduces DBun(X) ≃ DBun(Y) to QCoh(X)^op ≃ QCoh(Y)^op via [CL23, Theorem 4.27] and then applies Gabriel-Rosenberg; this is a valid deduction from two independent external theorems, and the paper itself acknowledges the statement is 'essentially a restatement' of Gabriel-Rosenberg. The self-citations ([CV25], [PV23], [Voo23], [LV25]) are contextual and not load-bearing for the main theorems, so they do not raise the circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The ledger is dominated by standard background and two external theorems; the only paper-specific ad hoc assumption is the affine-local gluing of the tangent-category axioms.

assumptions (5)
  • standard math ZFC set theory and standard categorical foundations (locally small categories, Grothendieck constructions, sufficient universes)
    Assumed throughout; no formal proof system is used.
  • standard math EGA-style scheme theory: quasi-coherent sheaves, affine morphisms, Zariski descent, relative spectrum construction
    Used throughout Sections 2-5; facts cited from [GD60a, GD60b, GD61, GD67].
  • domain assumption Gabriel-Rosenberg reconstruction theorem for quasi-separated schemes (Theorem 6.1.1)
    Loaded into the proof of Theorem 6.1.17; quoted from [Ros14] and [Bra18].
  • domain assumption Cruttwell-Lemay theorem that DBun(X)^op ≃ QCoh(X) for schemes ([CL23, Theorem 4.27/4.28])
    Loaded into the proof of Theorem 6.1.17 and Corollary 6.1.16; not reproved.
  • ad hoc to paper Affine-local verification of tangent-category identities glues to global identities on Sch/S
    Theorem 5.2.16 checks axioms by reducing to Example 5.1.13 on affine covers; the explicit descent argument for Definition 5.1.1 (6) is not given.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Deep Dive Into the Tangent Category of Schemes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MHAQ42TE

@misc{pith2026260806855,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Deep Dive Into the Tangent Category of Schemes},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MHAQ42TE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.06855}
}
abstract

In this largely expository paper we provide a deep and explicit exploration and exposition of the tangent structure on the category of schemes $\mathbf{Sch}_{/S}$ whose tangent functor $T(X) = T_{X/S}$ is the relative tangent scheme of Grothendieck described in \emph{\'El\'ements de G\'eom\'etrie Alg\'ebrique} 4. In particular we provide explicit descriptions of the ways that the bifibration of quasicoherent sheaves and bifbration of quesicoherent sheaves of algebras over schemes may be built from the ways in which the bifibrations of modules and commutative algebras over commutative rings interact. We also show the ways in which these interactions give rise to an explicit description of the standard tangent structure on the category of schemes in terms of sheaves of K\"ahler differentials, properties of the relative spectrum functor, and more. Finally, we show that quasi-coherent sheaves can be reconstructed from their category of differential bundles by showing that for quasi-separated schemes $X$ and $Y$, there is an isomorphism $X \cong Y$ if and only if there is an equivalence of categories $\mathbf{DBun}(X) \simeq \mathbf{DBun}(Y)$.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    189, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1994

    J.\@ Ad\' a mek and J\@ Rosick\' y , Locally presentable and accessible categories, London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series, vol. 189, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1994

    work page 1994

  2. [2]

    Blute, J

    R. Blute, J. R. B. Cockett, T. Porter, and R. A. G. Seely, K\" a hler categories , Cah. Topol. G\' e om. Diff\' e r. Cat\' e g. 52 (2011), no. 4, 253--268. 2895953

    work page 2011

  3. [3]

    Borceux, Handbook of categorical algebra, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, vol

    F. Borceux, Handbook of categorical algebra, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, vol. 2, Cambridge University Press, 1994

    work page 1994

  4. [4]

    Brandenburg, Rosenberg's reconstruction theorem, Expo

    M. Brandenburg, Rosenberg's reconstruction theorem, Expo. Math. 36 (2018), no. 1, 98--117. 3780029

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    J. R. B. Cockett and G. S. H. Cruttwell, Differential structure, tangent structure, and SDG , Appl. Categ. Structures 22 (2014), no. 2, 331--417. 3192082

    2014

  6. [6]

    , Connections in tangent categories, Theory Appl. Categ. 32 (2017), Paper No. 26, 835--888. 3684725

    work page 2017

  7. [7]

    , Differential bundles and fibrations for tangent categories, Cah. Topol. G\' e om. Diff\' e r. Cat\' e g. 59 (2018), no. 1, 10--92. 3792842

    2018

  8. [8]

    Leibniz Int

    J.\@ R.\@ B.\@ Cockett, G.\@ S.\@ H.\@ Cruttwell, J.\@ Gallagher, J.-S.\@ P.\@ Lemay, B.\@ MacAdam, G.\@ Plotkin, and D.\@ Pronk, Reverse derivative categories, 28th EACSL A nnual C onference on C omputer S cience L ogic, LIPIcs. Leibniz Int. Proc. Inform., vol. 152, Schloss Dagstuhl. Leibniz-Zent. Inform., Wadern, 2020, pp. Art. No. 18, 16. 4048217

    work page 2020

Show all 43 references
  1. [9]

    G.\@ S.\@ H.\@ Cruttwell, J.\@ Gallagher, and B.\@ MacAdam, Towards formalizing and extending differential programming using tangent categories, Proceedings of A pplied C ategory T heory 2019, ACT 2019, 2019

    2019

  2. [10]

    G.\@ S.\@ H.\@ Cruttwell and J-S.\@ P.\@ Lemay, Differential bundles in commutative algebra and algebraic geometry, Theory Appl. Categ. 39 (2023), Paper No. 36, 1077--1120. 4711655

    2023

  3. [11]

    Leibniz Int

    G.\@ S.\@ H.\@ Cruttwell and J.-S.\@ P.\@ Lemay, Reverse tangent categories, 32nd EACSL A nnual C onference on C omputer S cience L ogic, LIPIcs. Leibniz Int. Proc. Inform., vol. 288, Schloss Dagstuhl. Leibniz-Zent. Inform., Wadern, 2024, pp. Art. No. 21, 21. 4711622

    2024

  4. [12]

    G.\@ S.\@ H.\@ Cruttwell and M.\@ Lanfranchi, Pullbacks in tangent categories and tangent display maps, 2025, arXiv preprint available at https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.20699

    2025 arXiv

  5. [13]

    G.\@ S.\@ H.\@ Cruttwell, J.-S.\@ P.\@ Lemay, and E.\@ Vandenberg, A tangent category perspective on connections in algebraic geometry, Appl. Categ. Structures 33 (2025), no. 1, Paper No. 4, 40. 4838465

    2025

  6. [14]

    G. S. H. Cruttwell and R. B. B. Lucyshyn-Wright, A simplicial foundation for differential and sector forms in tangent categories, J. Homotopy Relat. Struct. 13 (2018), no. 4, 867--925. 3870775

    2018

  7. [15]

    Forthcoming

    J.\@ R.\@ B.\@ Cockett and G.\@ Vooys, The tangent restriction category of CR ig opposite, densities, and topologies on categories of rigs , 2025, Unpublished, in progress work. Forthcoming

    2025

  8. [16]

    Eisenbud, Commutative algebra, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol

    D. Eisenbud, Commutative algebra, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 150, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1995, With a view toward algebraic geometry. 1322960

    1995

  9. [17]

    thesis, University of Calgary, 2018, Available online at https://prism.ucalgary.ca/items/62dffd8e-525a-407a-a4f3-fd176fce6d77

    J.\@ Gallagher, The differential lambda-calculus: syntax and semantics for differential geometry, Ph.D. thesis, University of Calgary, 2018, Available online at https://prism.ucalgary.ca/items/62dffd8e-525a-407a-a4f3-fd176fce6d77

    2018

  10. [18]

    R.\@ Garner, An embedding theorem for tangent categories, Adv. Math. 323 (2018), 668--687. 3725887

    2018

  11. [19]

    Le langage des sch\'emas , vol

    A.\@ Grothendieck and J.\@ Dieudonn \'e , \'E l\'ements de g\'eom\'etrie alg\'ebrique : I. Le langage des sch\'emas , vol. 5, ch. \'E l\'ements de g\'eom\'etrie alg\'ebrique : C hapitre 0 (suite 1): Pr \'e liminares, pp. 11--78, Institut des Hautes \'Etudes Scientifiques, 1960 (fr)

    1960

  12. [20]

    , \' E l\' e ments de g\' e om\' e trie alg\' e brique. I . L e langage des sch\' e mas , no. 4, Springer-Verlag, 1960. 217083

    1960

  13. [21]

    \'etude globale \'el\'ementaire de quelques classes de morphismes , Publications Math\'ematiques de l'IH\'ES 8 (1961), 5--222 (fr)

    , \'E l\'ements de g\'eom\'etrie alg\'ebrique : II. \'etude globale \'el\'ementaire de quelques classes de morphismes , Publications Math\'ematiques de l'IH\'ES 8 (1961), 5--222 (fr)

    1961

  14. [22]

    \'etude locale des sch\'emas et des morphismes de sch\'emas, Premi\`ere partie , Publications Math\'ematiques de l'IH\'ES 20 (1964), 5--259 (fr)

    , \'E l\'ements de g\'eom\'etrie alg\'ebrique : IV. \'etude locale des sch\'emas et des morphismes de sch\'emas, Premi\`ere partie , Publications Math\'ematiques de l'IH\'ES 20 (1964), 5--259 (fr)

    1964

  15. [23]

    \'etude locale des sch\'emas et des morphismes de sch\'emas, Premi\`ere partie , vol

    , \'E l\'ements de g\'eom\'etrie alg\'ebrique : IV. \'etude locale des sch\'emas et des morphismes de sch\'emas, Premi\`ere partie , vol. 20, ch. \'E l\'ements de g\'eom\'etrie alg\'ebrique : C hapitre 0 (suite 4): Pr \'e liminares, pp. 5--221, Institut des Hautes \'Etudes Sci...

    1964

  16. [24]

    \'etude locale des sch\'emas et des morphismes de sch\'emas, Quatri\`eme partie , Publications Math\'ematiques de l'IH\'ES 32 (1967), 5--361 (fr)

    , \'E l\'ements de g\'eom\'etrie alg\'ebrique : IV. \'etude locale des sch\'emas et des morphismes de sch\'emas, Quatri\`eme partie , Publications Math\'ematiques de l'IH\'ES 32 (1967), 5--361 (fr)

    1967

  17. [25]

    224, Springer-Verlag, 1971

    A.\@ Grothendieck, Rev\^etements \'etales et groupe fondamental ( SGA 1) , Lecture notes in mathematics, vol. 224, Springer-Verlag, 1971

    1971

  18. [26]

    52, Springer-Verlag, New York-Berlin, 1977

    R.\@ Hartshorne, Algebraic geometry, Graduate texts in mathematics, vol. 52, Springer-Verlag, New York-Berlin, 1977

    1977

  19. [27]

    141, North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam, 1999

    Bart Jacobs, Categorical logic and type theory, Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, vol. 141, North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam, 1999. 1674451

    1999

  20. [28]

    P.\@ T.\@ Johnstone, Sketches of an elephant: a topos theory compendium. V ol. 1 , Oxford Logic Guides, vol. 43, The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, New York, 2002

    2002

  21. [29]

    N.\@ Johnson and D.\@ Yau, 2-dimensional categories, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2021. 4261588

    2021

  22. [30]

    J.-S. P. Lemay and G. Vooys, Important classes of morphisms and the relative cotangent sequence in tangent categories, 2025, Preprint available at https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.07874

    2025 arXiv

  23. [31]

    R.\@ B.\@ B.\@ Lucyshyn-Wright, On the geometric notion of connection and its expression in tangent categories, Theory Appl. Categ. 33 (2018), Paper No. 28, 832--866. 3852033

    2018

  24. [32]

    B.\@ MacAdam, Vector bundles and differential bundles in the category of smooth manifolds, Appl. Categ. Structures 29 (2021), no. 2, 285--310. 4228458

    2021

  25. [33]

    Availabe at https://prism.ucalgary.ca/items/05830be5-fbdf-4be2-a9a5-cc1e73762d7f/full

    B.\@ MacAdam, The functorial semantics of L ie theory , 2022, PhD Thesis. Availabe at https://prism.ucalgary.ca/items/05830be5-fbdf-4be2-a9a5-cc1e73762d7f/full

    2022

  26. [34]

    5, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1998

    S.\@ Mac Lane, Categories for the working mathematician, second ed., Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 5, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1998

    1998

  27. [35]

    S.\@ Mac Lane and I.\@ Moerdijk, Sheaves in geometry and logic, Universitext, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1994, A first introduction to topos theory, Corrected reprint of the 1992 edition

    1994

  28. [36]

    104, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1989

    Michael Makkai and Robert Par\' e , Accessible categories: the foundations of categorical model theory, Contemporary Mathematics, vol. 104, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1989. 1031717

    1989

  29. [38]

    Pronk and G

    D. Pronk and G. Vooys, Pseudolimits for tangent categories and equivariant tangents for varieties and smooth manifolds, 2024, |Preprint available at https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.11753

    2024

  30. [39]

    Rosick\' y , Abstract tangent functors, Diagrammes 12 (1984), JR1--JR11

    J. Rosick\' y , Abstract tangent functors, Diagrammes 12 (1984), JR1--JR11

    1984

  31. [40]

    Rosenberg, Spectra of noncommutative spaces, New Prairie Press, Manhatten, KS, 2014, E-book

    A. Rosenberg, Spectra of noncommutative spaces, New Prairie Press, Manhatten, KS, 2014, E-book. Accessed 2026 July 15

    2014

  32. [41]

    The Stacks project authors , The stacks project, https://stacks.math.columbia.edu, 2024, Available at https://stacks.math.columbia.edu

    2024

  33. [42]

    A.\@ Vistoli, Notes on grothendieck topologies, fibered categories and descent theory, 2007, Available at https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0412512

    2007 arXiv

  34. [43]

    Preprint available at https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.08183

    G.\@ Vooys, Tangent ind-categories, 2023, To appear. Preprint available at https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.08183

    2023 arXiv

  35. [44]

    G.\@ Vooys, Categories of pseudocones and equivariant descent, 2024, Preprint available at https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.10172

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.