ScalingStacks

0N3U

Proof. Presentability of 𝒱\mathcal{V} grants the existence of the values ∫MA\int_{M}A. Lemma 4.3.2.13 ofΒ [Lu1] states that these expressions define a functor, as indicated. Proposition 4.3.3.7 ofΒ [Lu1] states that this functor satisfies the universal property of being a left adjoint to the restriction ΞΉβˆ—\iota^{\ast}. We thus have the solid diagram among ∞\infty-categories

π– π—…π—€π’Ÿβ€‹π—‚π—Œπ—„π—‡π–‘β‘(𝒱)\textstyle{\Alg_{\disk_{n}^{B}}(\mathcal{V})\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}π–₯π—Žπ—‡βŠ—β‘(ℳ​𝖿𝗅𝖽nB,𝒱)\textstyle{\Fun^{\otimes}\bigl(\mfld_{n}^{B},\mathcal{V}\bigr)\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}π–₯π—Žπ—‡β‘(π’Ÿβ€‹π—‚π—Œπ—„π—‡π–‘,𝒱)\textstyle{\Fun(\disk_{n}^{B},\mathcal{V})\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}ΞΉ!\scriptstyle{\iota_{!}}π–₯π—Žπ—‡β‘(ℳ​𝖿𝗅𝖽nB,𝒱)\textstyle{\Fun(\mfld_{n}^{B},\mathcal{V})}

in which the downward functors are restriction to underlying ∞\infty-categories, these downward functors are fully faithful. It remains to explain how the βŠ—\otimes-presentability of 𝒱\mathcal{V} grants the existence of the dashed horizontal functor making the diagram commute.

We must show that, for each symmetric monoidal functor A:π’Ÿβ€‹π—‚π—Œπ—„π—‡π–‘β†’π’±A\colon\disk_{n}^{B}\to\mathcal{V}, and for each based map among finite sets I+→𝑓J+I_{+}\xrightarrow{f}J_{+}, the diagram of ∞\infty-categories

(ℳ​𝖿𝗅𝖽nB)I\textstyle{(\mfld_{n}^{B})^{I}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}fβˆ—\scriptstyle{f_{\ast}}(ΞΉ!A)I\scriptstyle{(\iota_{!}A)^{I}}𝒱I\textstyle{\mathcal{V}^{I}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}fβˆ—\scriptstyle{f_{\ast}}(ℳ​𝖿𝗅𝖽nB)J\textstyle{(\mfld_{n}^{B})^{J}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}(ΞΉ!A)J\scriptstyle{(\iota_{!}A)^{J}}𝒱J\textstyle{\mathcal{V}^{J}}

commutes. The map f:I+β†’J+f\colon I_{+}\to J_{+} is canonically a composition of a surjective active map fπ—Œπ—Žπ—‹π—ƒf^{\sf surj} followed by an injective active map f𝗂𝗇𝗃f^{\sf inj} followed by an inert map f𝗂𝗇𝗋𝗍f^{\sf inrt}, and so it is enough to verify commutativity of the above diagram for each such class of maps. The case of inert maps is obvious, because then fβˆ—f_{\ast} is projection and (ΞΉ!A)K(\iota_{!}A)^{K} is defined as the KK-fold product of functors, for K=I,JK=I,J. The case of injective active maps amounts to verifying that ΞΉ!A\iota_{!}A carries each monoidal unit to a monoidal unit. This follows because AA does so and because the over ∞\infty-categories π’Ÿβ€‹π—‚π—Œπ—„π—‡/βˆ…π–‘={βˆ…}=ℳ​𝖿𝗅𝖽n/βˆ…B\disk_{n/\emptyset}^{B}=\{\emptyset\}=\mfld_{n/\emptyset}^{B} consist solely of the empty manifold, which is the monoidal unity.

The case of surjective active maps follows from the case that f:I+β†’βˆ—+f\colon I_{+}\to\ast_{+} is given by +β‰ iβ†¦βˆ—+\neq i\mapsto\ast, so that fβˆ—=⨂If_{\ast}=\bigotimes^{I} is the II-fold tensor product. Well, because AA is symmetric monoidal, there is a canonical arrow ΞΉ!Aβˆ˜β¨‚IβŸΆβ¨‚I∘(ΞΉ!A)I\iota_{!}A\circ\bigotimes^{I}\longrightarrow\bigotimes^{I}\circ(\iota_{!}A)^{I} between functors (ℳ​𝖿𝗅𝖽nB)I→𝒱(\mfld_{n}^{B})^{I}\to\mathcal{V} that we will argue is an equivalence. This arrow evaluates on (Mi)i∈I(M_{i})_{i\in I} as the horizontal one in the following natural diagram in 𝒱\mathcal{V}:

π–Όπ—ˆπ—…π—‚π—†(π’Ÿβ€‹π—‚π—Œπ—„π—‡/β¨†π—‚βˆˆπ–¨β€‹π–¬π—‚π–‘β†’π’Ÿβ€‹π—‚π—Œπ—„π—‡π–‘β†’π– π’±)\textstyle{\colim\bigl(\disk^{B}_{n/\underset{i\in I}{\bigsqcup}M_{i}}\to\disk_{n}^{B}\xrightarrow{A}\mathcal{V}\bigr)\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}⨂i∈Iπ–Όπ—ˆπ—…π—‚π—†(π’Ÿβ€‹π—‚π—Œπ—„π—‡/π–¬π—‚π–‘β†’π’Ÿβ€‹π—‚π—Œπ—„π—‡π–‘β†’π– π’±)\textstyle{\underset{i\in I}{\bigotimes}\colim\bigl(\disk^{B}_{n/M_{i}}\to\disk_{n}^{B}\xrightarrow{A}\mathcal{V}\bigr)}π–Όπ—ˆπ—…π—‚π—†(βˆπ—‚βˆˆπ–¨β€‹π’Ÿβ€‹π—‚π—Œπ—„π—‡/𝖬𝗂𝖑→(π’Ÿβ€‹π—‚π—Œπ—„π—‡π–‘)𝖨→𝖠𝖨𝒱𝖨→⨂𝖨𝒱)\textstyle{\colim\Bigl(\underset{i\in I}{\prod}\disk^{B}_{n/M_{i}}\to(\disk_{n}^{B})^{I}\xrightarrow{A^{I}}\mathcal{V}^{I}\xrightarrow{\bigotimes^{I}}\mathcal{V}\Bigr)\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}(βˆ—)\scriptstyle{(\ast)}(†)\scriptstyle{(\dagger)}.

The arrow labeled byΒ (†\dagger) is an equivalence precisely because VβŠ—βˆ’:𝒱→𝒱V\otimes-\colon\mathcal{V}\to\mathcal{V} preserves colimits. By inspection, the II-fold disjoint union functor ⨆I:∏i∈Iπ’Ÿβ€‹π—‚π—Œπ—„π—‡/π–¬π—‚π–‘β†’β‰ƒπ’Ÿβ€‹π—‚π—Œπ—„π—‡/β¨†π—‚βˆˆπ–¨β€‹π–¬π—‚π–‘\bigsqcup^{I}\colon\prod_{i\in I}\disk^{B}_{n/M_{i}}\xrightarrow{\simeq}\disk^{B}_{n/\underset{i\in I}{\bigsqcup}M_{i}} is an equivalence between ∞\infty-categories, for it is essentially surjective and fully faithful. It follows that the arrow labeled byΒ (βˆ—\ast) is an equivalence, after observing the following commutative diagram among ∞\infty-categories:

∏i∈Iβ€‹π’Ÿβ€‹π—‚π—Œπ—„π—‡/𝖬𝗂𝖑\textstyle{\underset{i\in I}{\prod}\disk^{B}_{n/M_{i}}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}⨆I\scriptstyle{\bigsqcup^{I}}π’Ÿβ€‹π—‚π—Œπ—„π—‡/β¨†π—‚βˆˆπ–¨β€‹π–¬π—‚π–‘\textstyle{\disk^{B}_{n/\underset{i\in I}{\bigsqcup}M_{i}}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}(π’Ÿβ€‹π—‚π—Œπ—„π—‡π–‘)𝖨\textstyle{(\disk^{B}_{n})^{I}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}⨆I\scriptstyle{\bigsqcup^{I}}AI\scriptstyle{A^{I}}π’Ÿβ€‹π—‚π—Œπ—„π—‡π–‘\textstyle{\disk^{B}_{n}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}A\scriptstyle{A}𝒱I\textstyle{\mathcal{V}^{I}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}⨂I\scriptstyle{\bigotimes^{I}}𝒱.\textstyle{\mathcal{V}~.}

∎

Original mathematics by the credited authors. Source collection and HTML conversion remain in progress.

David Ayala, John Francis

Original source: arXiv:1206.5522v6