The Infinity Blog


This is the blog that documents my project of learning about ∞-categories. I've been looking at various references, but currently I'm following a set of lecture notes that I found on D.Cisinski's webpage. Basically, I'm rewriting his notes to suit my taste, and in the process I also add all the exercices that he left to the reader, as well as some further complements, and I correct some mistakes. It's a big project : I've only started in the summer of 2022, and I started as an absolute beginner, so it's still very tentative and constantly evolving.

Your comments are welcome and gratefully acknowledged!

Status Update :

  • November 15, 2022 : Cisinski has pointed out to me a simple proof, attributed to Myles Tierney and found in Joyal's CatLab that shows that weak equivalences in any model category are stable under retracts. Once one has such result, one can quickly prove Whitehead's theorem, following the argument in Hovey's book. I've included these proofs; as a consequence, the complicated discussion of equivalences of homotopies (that I borrowed from Quillen) is no longer needed, so I've removed it... But I might reinstate it in the future, if it becomes useful again : what else is it good for? I only used it to prove Whitehead's theorem, but the new proof of the latter is much simpler... Let me know, if you're an expert who happens to stumble on my notes...

  • February 24, 2023 : Today I'm finally done with the part about the "classical" theory of Kan-Quillen, that endows the category of simplicial sets with a model category structure whose fibrant objects are the Kan complexes; all this is relevant to ∞-categories, since Kan complexes are reinterpreted later as ∞-groupoids... Next up is Joyal's model structure on simplicial sets, for which the fibrant objects are exactly the ∞-categories. But for now I am taking some rest, because I'm slowed down by teaching, and also because I plan to flesh out the first preliminary chapter, with extra material on calculus of fractions and the subobject classifiers for categories of presheaves.

  • June 10, 2023 : There is an interesting byproduct of homotopy techniques, concerning the construction of localizations of small categories. Indeed, some months ago I found that I could use Freyd's adjoint functor theorem to construct such localizations : I exhibited an explicit solution set that solved the problem, thus obtaining an abstract proof of existence, without having bother with messy, though more explicit, graph constructions. I was quite happy with this argument, but recently I realized that I was kind of doing twice the same job : that's because I had previously proved the cocompleteness of the category Cat of small categories again via Freyd's adjoint theorem; and now I've just noticed that once one knows that Cat is cocomplete, one can construct arbitrary localizations by a sequence of suitable push-outs in Cat! This gives a rather more conceptual and transparent approach. The idea is borrowed from homotopy theory : indeed, there is an analogous technique for inverting given 1-simplices in simplicial sets, that can be transposed essentially verbatim to small categories, and that's how I now construct localizations of small categories in my notes!

  • July 10, 2023 : today I've completed the construction of the Joyal model category structure on the category of simplicial sets. From the construction, it is clear that every ∞-category is a fibrant object for this category, but more work is needed to show the converse : that will be my next goal! Another interesting result that is now included in my notes is the construction of the canonical model category structure on the category Cat of small categories; I also show that this is the unique model category structure on Cat whose weak equivalences are the equivalences of categories : I follow a proof that I found on the website nLab, an impressive online collaborative math resource.

  • July 28, 2023 : Today's version's biggest change is that the long chapter 3 has split into two separate chapters : the new chapter 3 now contains only the basic theory of model categories and derived functors, and it is followed by a chapter 4 that is dedicated to the construction of model categories, especially via the small object argument, since the model categories that we need are typically cofibrantly generated. Another important recent change is the addition of a section in chapter 2, dedicated to augmented simplicial sets, joins and slices : this material finds important applications in our study of left and right fibrations in section 5.5. And finally, I've corrected a very minor mistake in the proof of theorem 4.3.2. For today, that's all folks!

  • August 9, 2023 : many news in today's draft : the first important result is Joyal's theorem that identifies Kan complexes with the ∞-groupoids. Next, I've added a rather technical result, that morally says that every termwise invertible natural transformation between ∞-categories is actually invertible. This is an important ingredient in the proof of another of Joyal's theorems, that is the latest addition in these notes, and that shows that the ∞-categories are precisely the fibrant objects of the Joyal model category structure; also, the fibrations between ∞-categories are precisely the isofibrations, just as in the canonical model structure on Cat (the category of small categories).

  • October 6, 2023 : Today I'm finally done with the homotopy theory of ∞-categories. The text now consists of 6 chapters : the last two are dedicated respectively to the Kan-Quillen model category structure on simplicial sets, and to the Joyal model category structure on the same category. Chapter 6 also contains a discussion of higher homotopy groups and of Serre's long exact sequence for a Kan fibration, since this material is needed for the study of ∞-categories, especially for characterizing weak categorical equivalences, fully faithful functors and essentially surjective functors of ∞-categories. All of this corresponds roughly to the first 3 chapters of Cisinski's lecture notes. I will now take a longish break from writing : I plan to re-read all that I've written so far, and then to add more background foundational material on set theory; after which, I'll of course resume learning and writing about ∞-categories and homotopical algebra.

  • November 1, 2023 : Last week I've begun the long and slow process of reading all the text that I've written so far. Today I can report that I've finished reading the first 20 pages : I've corrected many small embarrassing misprints, but nothing of note. It will take a while, so you won't see much happening in the next several weeks, but I'll post regular updates.

  • November 17, 2023 : Today I've finished reading the first 42 pages, i.e. up to the end of section 1.6. I've corrected many little typos, and I've made some small additions to the text, such as extra details for some proofs, but nothing important. Maybe the most memorable change is that I've extended the construction of what I call "global colimit" to arbitrary indexing categories (whereas earlier I only dealt with filtered indexing categories); this is a device that provides some language for dealing with cases where the colimit of a given set-valued functor doesn't quite exist, due to set-theoretical issues, but one has a class that enjoys the universal property of such a colimit (the point being that in our set-theoretic framework, a "real" colimit would have to be a set, rather than just a class). Anyway, this is one of those nit-picking issues that appear very infrequently, and are of potential interest only to the most dedicated set-theoreticians, I guess, but if you really want to know more, check out example 1.1.19.

  • December 1, 2023 : Today I've finished reading the first 62 pages. As usual, I've corrected many small misprints and a few minor mistakes, but nothing important to report.

  • December 17, 2023 : Today I've finished reading the first 80 pages. As usual, I've corrected many small misprints and a few minor mistakes, but nothing much to report. The only somewhat notable change is that I've modified axiom (EZ0) in the definition of Eilenberg-Zilber categories : then the remark after the definition can be suppressed. Also, I added some details and corrected some minor mistakes in the proof of proposition 1.10.12, that provides the basics of the calculus of fractions for categories.

  • December 28, 2023 : Today I've finished reading the first 103 pages. The most notable change is in the proof of proposition 2.5.15, which now has a few more details; also, paragraph 2.5.14 has been heavily revised, and this required adding a couple of remarks in earlier sections : remarks 2.3.5 and 1.5.11. Also, the last part of the proof of proposition 2.5.11 needed some corrections.

  • January 1, 2024 : Today I've finished reading the first 120 pages. The most notable revisions are in the proof of proposition 3.1.9(v), which was slightly incomplete. Also, there was a slight mistake in condition (b) of definition 3.1.16, which caused some confusion in the proof of lemma 3.1.18.

  • February 11, 2024 : I have been silent for a while, but work has been proceeding apace, though in unexpected directions. The starting point for this diversion was an observation that I remembered reading in Quillen's "Homotopical Algebra" : he proves that one can also obtain (up to equivalence) the homotopy category H_C of a model category C by inverting weak equivalences inside the subcategory C_c of fibrant objects (or alternatively C_f of cofibrant objects) of C. I had already included this result, but then Quillen also remarked that the localization of weak equivalences in C_c can be done in two steps : first one forms a new category C'_c with the same objects as C_c, and whose morphisms are the homotopy classes of morphisms of C_c; next, one inverts in C'_c the homotopy classes of weak equivalences (and similarly if one starts from C_f). The advantage of this two-step procedure, is that the homotopy classes of weak equivalences in C_c admit a calculus of fractions, which allows to give a more explicit description of the morphisms of the homotopy category of C. This last remark (which generalizes what one does in order to construct the derived category of an abelian category...) is the one that I wanted to include as well. Now, Quillen justifies his remark by proving that the localization functor C'_c-->H_C has a fully faithful adjoint, and then he quotes a result from Gabriel-Zisman's book. So I checked the latter, and included the relevant propositions to complete Quilllen's argument. But I also found in Gabriel-Zisman's book some further interesting result about localizations of additive or abelian categories, so I included that as well. But there was still something to be desired, since Gabriel and Zisman are not so explicit about their set-theoretical foundations, and in general, localizations tend to give large objects. Especially, a question arises which is relevant to Quillen's discussion : suppose that one knows that for a given category C and given class of morphisms S, the localization C_S of C that inverts S exists; suppose moreover that one knows that S admits a calculus of fractions. Then, one can show that the morphisms X-->Y of C_S are represented by equivalence classes [X,Y] of "fractions with denominators in S" in the expected way ; that is, there is an obvious map [X,Y]-->Hom_{C_S}(X,Y) that is surjective. By the general theory of calculus of fractions, one knows moreover that, if the class [X,Y] is a set, then this map is bijective. Now the question is : assuming that the localization C_S exists, and that S admits a calculus of fraction, is the above map always a bijection? That is, do these condition imply that [X,Y] is a set? Unexpectedly (at least, for me) the answer turns out to be negative, in general : I asked Gabber, and he found a counterexample! In order to properly deal with all this material, it is convenient to add some more foundational material, which mostly amounts to introducing a suitable language : especially, it is useful to have a notion of what I call "wide categories" that are exactly like categories, except that the morphisms between any two given objects are only classes (rather than sets); then of course most standard elementary category theory extends to the wide context, with some care, because one needs to make sure that the operations for handling such large classes are legitimate... So, this is basically what I'm doing now, and I'm advancing slowly but steadily. The takeaway is that, when quoting results about the existence of localizations in situations where one inverts a class of morphism that admits calculus of fractions, one should take care to ensure that the classes [X,Y] of "fractions with denominators in S" are really sets, even in cases where one knows a priori that the localization does exist, because otherwise one only knows by general nonsense that [X,Y] maps surjectively onto the set of morphisms X-->Y in the localization, but one does not has necessarily the bijectivity of these maps. Is that clear? Raise your hand if you stayed with me till here! And for tonight, that's all folks!

  • March 3, 2024 : That's it : the long digression on localization of categories is done with! At least, for the time being : the first chapter will certainly undergo more sysmic changes in the future. If you are curious, Gabber's counterexample that I mentioned in the previous post can be found starting on page 80 : it encompasses proposition 1.2.14 and example 1.2.15. An interesting feature of this counterexample is that it uses some constructions from combinatorial group theory known as HNN extensions! So there you go : an application of group theory to pure category theory. Quite neat, isn't it? Now we can resume the reading of the notes : stay tuned!

  • March 29, 2024 : Today I'm finally done with the reading of the first 158 pages, that is, up to the end of section 3.4, dedicated to derived functors, in the context of model categories. It took more time than expected, because halfway through I realized that some intermediate constructions could be improved : earlier on I had introduced fibrant-cofibrant replacements for objects of a model category; this is a standard tool that is used notably for constructing the homotopy category of a model category : one defines it first on the subcategory of fibrant-cofibrant objects (where no localization is needed : one only takes homotopy classes of morphisms), and then one projects the whole model category onto the homotopy category of the fibrant-cofibrant objects, via fibrant-cofibrant replacements (this generalizes what one does when constructing the derived category of an abelian category : there the fibrant-cofibrant replacements are given by injective or projective resolutions, depending on the context). But while re-reading this material I realized that there are two more similar projections from the model category, respectively onto the subcategory of fibrant objects, and onto the subcategory of cofibrant objects (more precisely, since my fibrant and cofibrant replacements are not functorial on the nose, I project on the homotopy category of fibrant - or cofibrant - objects). These two constructions are more basic than the fibrant-cofibrant one : indeed, the latter can be obtained by combining the former ones. So, I had to do many small changes, that taken together amount to quite a considerable modification of the text. This has also impacted the section on derived functors, since left derived functors are more directly related to cofibrant replacements, whereas right derived functors employ fibrant replacements.

  • April 17, 2024 : Today I've finished reading the first 174 pages, that is, up to the end of chapter 3 : hurray! Again, it took somewhat longer than I expected, largely due to teaching distractions. The main changes are in the statement of proposition 3.5.11, which had a small mistake (without any consequence), and in the proof of proposition 3.6.5, which is now slightly shorter, because parts of it have been extracted and dealt with separately, with more care and more details : these parts concern auxiliary results about fibrant and cofibrant objects in slice categories X/C, when C is already a model category, and the induced model category on X/C is induced by C, as in proposition 3.2.4(iii); then we also consider the functor x_!:X'/C-->X/C induced by a morphism x:X-->X' : since C is finitely cocomplete, x_! has a left adjoint x^!, and the pair (x^!,x_!) is a Quillen adjunction. All these complements are now spread between remark 3.2.5 and examples 3.3.4, 3.4.6(iii,iv) and 3.4.19. Henceforth I should be able to advance more quickly, since teaching is over until next fall.

  • April 26, 2024 : Today I've finished reading the first 190 pages. The most notable correction concerns the definition of k-small categories, k-small object in a cocomplete category, and k-accessible functor (for any cardinal k) : namely, in all these definitions there appeared a strict inequality (of the form : "something is strict less than k"), which conflicted with several other references, in which the same definitions have instead a non-strict inequality. The difference is mostly harmless, except that when one has strict inequalities, certain assertions are valid only for regular cardinals k, whereas with non-strict inequalities they are valid for arbitrary infinite cardinals. However, in at least one place, the difference becomes rather annoying : namely, in Proposition 4.2.11(ii), which requires a one-line proof in case one has non-strict inequalities, whereas it would require some non-trivial identities concerning exponentials of cardinals, if one adopted the strict inequalities in the definition of k-accessible functors. This is not such a trivial issue, since --while investigating the problem-- I've learned that the properties of cardinal exponentiation are strongly dependent on the chosen set-theoretical framework : in particular, on whether or not one accepts the generalized continuous hypothesis, and I definitely do not wish to have a proposition in my notes to depend on any extraneous set-theoretical assumptions. So, I switched throughout to the more standard definitions with non-strict inequalities : this has involved going back to page one and checking every instance where these notions appear, but luckily I've been able to do that rather quickly.

  • Mai 6, 2024 : Today I've finished reading the first 213 pages, that is, until the end of section 4.5. I've corrected many small misprints, but nothing especially remarkable.

  • May 19, 2024 : Today I've finished reading the first 236 pages. The first notable change concerns proposition 5.1.14, which was not stated correctly (the proof is unchanged). Similarly, I've corrected and expanded a little lemma 5.2.1. Next, I've (hopefully) improved the discussion of the first properties of Kan's Sd and Ex functors (at the beginning of section 5.3), and the proof of lemma 5.3.4. Several other misprints and minor slips have been also corrected, as usual.

  • May 24, 2024 : Today I've finished reading that first 245 pages, that is, up to the end of chapter 5 : olé! The most notable change is the correction of a subtle mistake in the proof of theorem 5.3.11 : it took me one day to figure out that my proof had a gap, one more day to realize that the gap was an actual mistake (rather than just an incomplete or missing argument), and then one more day to find a fix and write it up.

  • May 29, 2024 : Today I've finished reading that first 260 pages, that is, up to the end of section 6.3. The most notable changes concern :

    *) corollary 6.1.10, that has been slightly improved and included as part (ii) of corollary 6.1.9

    *) remark 6.2.2(ii) that seemed to be slightly incorrect, so I've introduced a notion of "strictly conservative morphism" to fix this, but I don't expect that I will make much use of this notion

    *) and especially, proposition 6.3.3, where I was unable to understand my previous proof, so I have redone it, in the style of proposition 5.1.10 : indeed, the same argument appears in the context of anodyne extensions, inner anodyne extensions, and left/right anodyne extensions.

  • June 10, 2024 : Today I've finished reading that first 276 pages, that is, up to the end of section 6.5. I've made a large number of modifications to the text : I've corrected many small (but embarrassing!) mistakes, and I've added many small (but cute!) improvements. There are too many to detail them all, but I'll just mention two : a new part (iv) of corollary 6.5.5 now states that the adjoint pair given by the functors k(-,X) and h(-,X) is a Quillen adjunction, for every ∞-category X; and a new part (ii) of proposition 6.2.6 states that the adjoint pair given by products and internal homs (in the category of simplicial sets) is a Quillen adjunction, relative to the Joyal model structure : the same assertion was already observed earlier, for the Kan-Quillen model structure (corollary 5.1.12(i)), but the Joyal variant is useful in other situations.

  • June 18, 2024 : Today I've finished reading that first 291 pages, that is, up to the construction of the Serre long exact sequence for a Kan fibration. I had to correct some mistakes in my presentation : I had stated that the loop functor on pointed ∞-categories preserves all representable limits, but my argument only proves that it preserves small products, as well as certain fibre products : the latter are important in the construction of the Serre exact sequence (see example 6.6.5(iii)). By the way, I do not know whether the category of ∞-categories is complete : it has small products, but I don't know whether it has equalizers. Even if it had equalizers, they might not commute with the inclusion into the larger category of all simplicials sets, so that would not imply left exactness of the loop functor. For my construction of Serre exact sequence, I follow Cisinski's presentation in his lecture notes on ∞-categories, which makes use of some special properties of Kan fibrations and Kan complexes; on the other hand, I believe that there is an abstract approach to loop functors that makes sense in arbitrary model categories, so that one has a version of Serre long exact sequence in any such model category. In particular, there should be an assertion valid more generally for isofibrations (instead of Kan fibrations), obtained by applying this abstract approach to Joyal's model category structure on simplicial sets... Maybe at some point I'll try to learn all this.

  • June 24, 2024 : Today I've finished reading the whole text : hurray! I've concluded with some house-cleaning : I've rearranged somewhat the contents of sections 1.6 and 1.7. Now I'll take a short break, since I've got some exams to grade; then I'll be back and start again adding new material : first I'm going to add some background on set-theoretical foundations, including cardinal and ordinal numbers. Next, we'll get back to ∞-categories : stay tuned!

  • July 12, 2024 : And we're back! As announced earlier, the next goal is to include set-theoretic foundational material. For this, I am following Mendelson's book on Mathematical Logic. Now, in order to do justice to such a subject, one must include a certain amount of preliminaries concerning formal languages and axiomatic systems; hence, I am starting from the very beginning, that is, from propositional calculus and its axiomatisation, which I have just finished adding today : the first section of the notes contains this material, up to a proof of the completeness and consistency of the axiomatic theory of propositional logic. Concerning the proof of consistency : I feel that Mendelson's discussion leaves some questions unaddressed, of a meta-logical nature : essentially, I fret about what exactly is achieved, given that such a proof must be carried out within an axiomatic system which is of necessity stronger than propositional logic itself, so it seems to be tainted by circularity... I attempt a discussion of these questions in the final remark of this section (remark 1.1.22) but I am not entirely certain that I am doing a good job at it, so if you think you have a better answer, or if you can point to a reference which gives a more thorough/thoughtful answer, please let me know by all means!

  • July 20, 2024 : Today's version adds the first elements of first order logic and elementary model theory : this material is contained in a new section 1.2 which is complete, and a section 1.3 that I've just started, so watch it grow! I am following Mendelson's textbook very closely : some parts are basically cut-and-pasted from it. So, not so much to report right now, and we'll be toiling with first order logic and model theory for a while, I expect.

  • July 26, 2024 : Today's version completes the new section 1.3, dedicated to (axiomatic) first order theories. I follow Mendelson very closely, except in the treatment of so-called Rule C, which I found rather sketchy in Mendelson's book (where it is presented in section 2.6). I've added more details, and one little auxiliary extra step which seems to me necessary to complete the proof : see proposition 1.3.15. Next up : completeness of first order predicate calculus!

  • August 2, 2024 : Rejoice! Today's version contains a new section 1.4 detailing the proof of the famous Gödel's completeness theorem for predicate calculus; also included are a proof of Skolem-Löwenheim's theorem, and several complements, notably a treatment of first order theories with equality. It is remarkable that all this foundational material can be presented in just 34 pages! Mendelson continues with several further topics concerning first order theories and their applications (e.g. a detailed treatment of the basics of non-standard analysis), but we shall skip them, and also the following chapter of his book, dedicated to Peano arithmetic, Gödel's incompleteness theorems and the theory of recursive functions. Instead, we shall next jump straight to the chapter dedicated to axiomatic set theory : stay tuned!

  • August 12, 2024 : Today's version includes a new section 1.5 that presents the axioms for Von Neumann-Bernays-Gödel's set theory (NBG) : olé! We include the Axiom of Global Choice : this is the only notable divergence from Mendelson's treatment, since in his version of the theory, he uses only the "standard" axiom of choice (though he does mention also global choice). Later I will add also another last axiom : the axiom of regularity, that we need in order to apply Ross's trick for the construction of equivalence classes in NBG theory : stay tuned!

    Another, rather minor, difference occurs in the definition of predicative well-formed formulas (wfs) : in Mendelson, these are defined as the wfs of NBG in which only set variables (so, no class variable) are quantified; but I have added also the condition that within the scope of any quantifier "for all x" or "there exists x" the variable x is not bound. This is a natural condition, and I cannot see any possible application in which such condition would be violated. The notion of predicative wf appears in the so-called "class existence theorem", a powerful theorem (or maybe, metatheorem) of NBG that says that for every predicative wf B(x_1,...,x_n) in n free variables (for any arbitrary n), there exists a class that contains precisely the n-tuples of sets (S_1,...,S_n) that verify the wf, that is, such that B(S_1,...,S_n) holds. The corresponding assertion becomes an axiom schema in Zermelo-Fränkel set theory, but in NBG it is derived from a finite list of its instances : this is the main reason why NBG is finitely axiomatisable, whereas ZF is not. Anyway, I cannot completely follow Mendelson's proof of the class existence theorem, for his definition of predicative wfs : maybe it does works, but some steps are certainly unclear; but if I add my rather harmless condition, the argument becomes very transparent.

  • August 20, 2024 : Today's version includes a new section 1.6 that presents the basics of the theory of ordinal numbers. More material about ordinals will be added later, after we discuss the theory of cardinal numbers, our next goal. One notable thing that I have learned while redacting this material, is that the theory of transfinite induction does NOT depend on the axiom of choice : I confess that I had always assumed that transfinite induction was essentially equivalent to choice (or something equivalent, such as Zorn's lemma, of course). Now I undertand all this much better, and as a consequence I will follow Mendelson's lead, and move to a later section the discussion of the axiom of choice (for now, it is still listed together with the other axioms of NBG, but I will move it forward, soon). So anyway, this means that certain proofs can be carried out in NBG by transfinite induction, without appealing to choice : for instance, one shows that every well-ordered set is isomorphic to a unique ordinal (and the isomorphism is unique as well); on the other hand, in order to prove that every set can be well-ordered, I believe that one needs choice.

  • August 27, 2024 : Today's version includes a new section 1.7 dealing with the theory of cardinality (or equinumerosity, following Mendelson's terminology). Two of the most remarkable results in this section are Bernstein's theorem (that says that if we have a injection from X to Y, and also a injection from Y to X, then we have a bijection between X and Y), and Cantor's theorem (a set x is never equinumerous with the set P(x) of subsets of x). Moreover, we may now define finite sets and countable sets, and we prove several intuitive properties of such sets, whose proofs are not as trivial as one might expect. All these results are proven in NBG without axiom of choice, but other results about cardinality to be added in later sections will require choice.

  • September 5, 2024 : Here we are again : today's version has a new section 1.8, dealing with ordinal and cardinal arithmetic. As usual, I follow closely Mendelson's text, but I've added here and there some little complements, some extra details, and I've corrected some sloppiness and minor imprecisions in Mendelson's treatment. There are several interesting results, e.g. the construction by transfinite induction of the sequence of initial ordinals (which are essentially canonical representatives for cardinal classes, at least if one accepts the axiom of choice), and a proof, due to Sierpinski that the cartesian square of any initial ordinal has the same cardinality as itself. Next, we are now ready to discuss the axioms of choice and of regularity; actually, the axiom of (global) choice was already mentioned at the end of section 1.5, but it has now been moved to the beginning of section 1.9. Needless to say, nothing in sections 1.6, 1.7 and 1.8 depends on the axiom of choice!
    The discussion of logic and set-theory amounts by now to a significant portion of the text : today's version also reorganizes this portion as a separate chapter. This first chapter later will include some of the material that is included in what has now become chapter 2.

  • September 13, 2024 : Section 1.9 is now complete! And with this section, also the first chapter of our text is essentially done. As already announced, this final section contains a discussion of the axiom of choice and the axiom of regularity, as well as of the related foundation axiom. The last result is a proof (due to Cohen) of a theorem of Sierpinski, showing that the generalized continuum hypothesis implies the axiom of choice. We are now ready for the next phase of the project : first, a little clean-up, that will involve transferring some material from chapter two to chapter one, and some very minor reorganization of some paragraphs in chapter one. Then, some foundational material on families of classes and wide categories will have to be revised a little, to merge it with the theory developed in chapter one. One day, I might return to chapter one, maybe to add some results such as the independence of the axiom of choice from the other axioms of AC : that's a bit ambitious, but doable, given enough time : we'll see!

  • October 1, 2024 : The little clean-up announced above is complete (for now : I actually got a bit bored with this, so I cleaned up completely only the first two sections of chapter 2... at some point I might return to this chore). Maybe the most notable change is that now section 1.5 has a new paragraph 1.5.28 containing the discussion of families of classes. Sooo, we're now ready to return to ∞-categories! I have indeed started looking at chapter 4 of Cisinski's lecture notes, and there's a new page at the end of my notes, with some basic definitions pertaining to material in that chapter, but I'm still warming up, so I'm a bit slow; also teaching has restarted, which will slow me even more... but bear with me!

  • October 21, 2024 : Today I've completed my rewriting of section 4.1 of Cisinski's lecture notes. I haven't found any mistakes in this section (except for very minor ones), but several proofs were very sketchy, and I had to expand them considerably : this material occupies now section 8.1 of my notes. Also, I had to correct a small mistake in the proof of theorem 7.5.1 : the correction is contained in claim 7.5.2. Another interesting addition is corollary 4.3.12, showing that a model category is completely determined by its class of cofibrations and its class of fibrant objects : I learned this interesting result from Cisinski, and it is actually used in the characterization of the controvariant model structure over a given simplicial set S.

  • December 18, 2024 : I've been silent for a while, but work has been proceeding apace! As of today, my rewriting of section 4.2 of Cisinski's lecture notes is complete. I have been slowed down considerably, because again Cisinski's treatment is more and more sketchy, but I've been able to justify every statement. One especially tricky point was the construction of a natural morphism Hom(A,X/x)-->Hom(A,X)/x in the proof of proposition 4.2.12 : Cisinski only gives the briefest explanation, which I couldn't understand, so I had to find my own way; in this, I was helped considerably by another source that so far I had not looked much at : namely Markus Land's "Introduction to Infinity Categories". Land's treatment of joins and slices is somewhat preferable to Cisinski's, and I've merged it into my account of these constructions. As a result, my treatment diverges substantially from both Land's and Cisinski's, and is now spread between two sections : section 3.4 and section 3.5. My construction of the above natural morphism is found in example 3.5.3(iii) of my notes, and an analogous one for so called "fat slices" is detailed in example 3.5.9(ii) : maybe mine is not the most conceptual way of introducing these maps, but it is reasonably clean, and I learned quite a few things by figuring all this out by myself, so I'm rather satisfied. Of course, if I learn more, I might be led to revisit this material, but this is true for every aspect of this project.