Search on MathOverflow… Log in Sign up

Anybody can ask a question

MathOverflow is a question and answer site for
professional mathematicians. It only takes a
minute to sign up. Anybody can answer

Sign up to join this community

The best answers are voted up and
rise to the top

Home
Examples of categorification Ask Question

Questions
Asked 9 years, 8 months ago Active 9 years, 8 months ago Viewed 5k times
Tags

Users What is your favorite example of categorification?

Featured on Meta

Unanswered big-list categorification examples

29 Feedback post: New moderator
reinstatement and appeal process
share cite edited Oct 25 '10 at 23:37 community wiki revisions
improve this question follow 2 revisions, 2 users
The new moderator agreement is now live
Jan Weidner 100%
47 for moderators to accept across the…

Linked
4 amazon.com/Category-Fifty-Drawings-Edward-Gorey/dp/0764937502 – Will Jagy Oct 25 '10
at 21:32 1 Real/complex addition, multiplication, and
exponentiation from a categorical
12 Anybody who wants to make a more enduring contribution to the mathematics community viewpoint?
might try to construct a concise article with the title What is a .... Categorification? for the
widely distributed AMS Notices. Many of the articles published in that column are far too
technical for the general reader, I think, due to the natural self-consciousness people feel Related
about what the experts will think. But categorification has the great advantage of being readily
illustrated by user-friendly examples. (I'd do this myself if I had any expertise at all.) – Question feed
Jim Humphreys Oct 27 '10 at 18:46

add a comment

19 Answers Active Oldest Votes

There are a bunch; I don't know that I have a favorite. Here's one for now:

The free commutative monoid functor is a categorification of the exponential function.

36
Edit: I have been asked to explain this, so I will. We'll interpret "commutative monoid" in
any cocomplete symmetric monoidal category 𝐶 where ⊗ distributes over colimits
(each 𝑋 ⊗ − preserves colimits); the simplest way of ensuring that is to assume the
category is symmetric monoidal closed.

Then, at the level of formulas, the free commutative monoid is

exp(𝑋) = ∑ 𝑋 ⊗𝑛 /𝐧!
𝑛≥0

where 𝐧! is the categorifier's notation for the symmetric group 𝑆𝑛 , and we divide out by
the canonical action of the 𝑆𝑛 on 𝑋 ⊗𝑛 .

There is an awful lot more to say about the categorified analogy, but I'll just say one.
Using the hypotheses on the symmetric monoidal category 𝐶 , the object exp(𝑋) carries
a commutative monoid structure, and in fact it is the free commutative monoid on the
object 𝑋 (think of the symmetric algebra for the category 𝐶 = 𝑉 𝑒𝑐𝑡 , for instance). Like
any free functor, the left adjoint exp preserves colimits, for example coproducts. What is
the coproduct of two commutative monoids (in the category of commutative monoid
objects)? Their tensor product in 𝐶 ! Thus, we arrive at the exponential law

exp(𝑋 + 𝑌 ) ≅ exp(𝑋) ⊗ exp(𝑌 )

and this has many applications.

share cite edited Oct 26 '10 at 11:43 community wiki

improve this answer follow 2 revisions

3 Can you explain that a bit? – Jan Weidner Oct 26 '10 at 6:19

5 And if you do your symmetrizing in a derived way, you get the free infinite loopspace, or 𝐸∞
monoid -- stable homotopy instead of homology -- spectrum objects instead of abelian group
objects -- ... – Tom Goodwillie Oct 26 '10 at 16:25

Thanks Todd for the additional explanation, this example is really nice! Thanks Tom for the
additional information! – Jan Weidner Oct 26 '10 at 21:34

@Todd: What a fantastic example!! Really, this is one of my favorite MO answers so far. –
Martin Brandenburg Jan 12 '11 at 23:20

@Martin: thank you very much! The mathematics is indeed beautiful to contemplate; one of
my favorite applications is to the structure of the Lie algebra operad as a categorified
logarithm valued in superspaces, via the PBW theorem. I tried to say something about this a
long time ago at math.ucr.edu/home/baez/trimble/trimble_lie_operad.pdf , but I'm afraid I
didn't do justice to it... – Todd Trimble ♦ Jan 13 '11 at 0:14

show 8 more comments

The move from betti numbers to homology groups.

Although this might not fit super tightly with the usual modern examples of
25 "categorification" (in the way that say a monoidal category is a categorification of a
monoid), it is probably the first and most important example of a concept being
categorified, allowing for notions such as functoriality, naturality, etc. to flourish. [No way
for a continuous map between spaces to induce a map between betti numbers! The old
days before functoriality!].

share cite answered Oct 26 '10 at 1:32 community wiki

improve this answer follow Beren Sanders

3 Maybe one should consider the categorification of Euler characteristic to homology groups.
This is generalized in the theories of Floer homologies of 3-manifolds and Khovanov
homology, whose Euler characteristics give the Alexander polynomial and Jones polynomial,
respectively. – Ian Agol Oct 26 '10 at 3:36

1 This is just about the first example given in the paper "Categorification" by Baez and Dolan,
so I'd say it fits in quite well with the modern spirit. An excellent example of structural thinking.
– Todd Trimble ♦ Oct 26 '10 at 13:45

add a comment

Here's another example: the functor which maps a group to its classifying space is a
categorification of taking the reciprocal.
21 Edit: The idea is that the total space 𝐸𝐺 of the classifying bundle of 𝐺 is contractible
and a cofibrant replacement of the point 1 on which 𝐺 acts freely. Thus, the construction
𝐵𝐺 = 𝐸𝐺/𝐺 is taking a stack-y quotient 𝐵𝐺 = 1//𝐺 .
There is a bit more to this idea than may first appear; let me take a related example
(which may appear to have some Eulerian "wishful thinking" in it, but have a little faith
here!). One way of taking the reciprocal is to pass to a geometric series, so that one
suggestive notation for the free monoid construction

⊗𝑛
∑ 𝑋
𝑛≥0

(in a suitable monoidal category; see my other comment on categorifying

exponentiation) is a categorified reciprocal 1/(1 − 𝑋) . We can apply this idea in group
cohomology for a group 𝐺 as follows: think of ℤ as being an abelianized point, and
consider a standard 𝐺 -free resolution of ℤ such as the normalized homogeneous bar
resolution, which we can think of as an abelianized 𝐸𝐺 . In one way of constructing this
bar resolution (see e.g. Hilton-Stammbach p. 217), the degree 𝑛 component of 𝐸𝐺 is

ℤ𝐺 ⊗ 𝐼𝐺⊗𝑛
where 𝐼𝐺 is the augmentation ideal, i.e., the kernel of the augmentation map
𝜀 : ℤ𝐺 → ℤ. As a bare module (or seen in degree 0), 𝐼𝐺 can be seen as an
abelianized "𝐺 − 1". However, in the differential-graded world, it is better to think of it as
in degree 1, and this degree 1 shift Σ𝐼𝐺 can be seen as a categorified "
−𝐼𝐺 = 1 − 𝐺 " (this may make more sense in the "super-world"; see for example my
old notes on the Lie operad when I was doing some work with Saunders Mac Lane, or
consider for example the occurrence of signs in the Euler characteristic). So now the
total space of the bar resolution 𝐸𝐺 is the sum of the degree 𝑛 components

ℤ𝐺 ⊗ ∑(Σ𝐼𝐺)⊗𝑛
𝑛≥0

which is an abelianized categorified form of 𝑔 ⋅ ∑𝑛≥0 (1 − 𝑔)𝑛 which is formally 1 by the

geometric series. Very similar types of categorified geometric series constructions occur
in Joyal's theory of species (see especially his article on virtual species in Springer LNM
1234), which constructs the Lie operad by categorified constructions [if you read
between the lines!], and in the bar resolution for operads as discussed by Ginzburg-
Kapranov; I tried to amplify this in my notes on the Lie operad.

Just to put one final gloss on this: consider the Schubert cell decomposition of projective
space as a finite geometric series. For a field 𝑘 we have

𝑛−1 𝑘𝑛 − 1
ℙ (𝑘) = = 1 + 𝑘 + 𝑘2 + … + 𝑘𝑛−1
𝑘−1
(the '1' in the numerator is a zero vector, and the denominator is nonzero scalars 𝑘∗ ).
We can pass to a limit and get infinite-dimensional projective space. Keeping in mind
that degree shifts introduce some sign changes in the geometric series, the infinite-
dimensional projective space ℝℙ∞ would be a model of the homotopy quotient
1//ℝ∗ ≃ 1//ℤ2 .
share cite edited Oct 26 '10 at 15:52 community wiki
improve this answer follow 2 revisions

Which is most easily seen for finite groups... – David Roberts Oct 26 '10 at 2:44

2 @Todd: Can you explain this? – Martin Brandenburg Oct 26 '10 at 9:06

I will at my next available opportunity... – Todd Trimble ♦ Oct 26 '10 at 11:46

add a comment

The classical BGG resolution as a categorification of the Weyl character formula.

share cite answered Oct 26 '10 at 0:48 community wiki

18 improve this answer follow José Figueroa-O'Farrill

That's pretty cool! How do you deduce the Weyl character formula from the BGG resolution?
– David MJC Oct 26 '10 at 8:11

The BGG resolution gives you a resolution of the simple module in terms of direct sums of
Verma modules. The Euler-Poincaré principle applied to the resolution, together with the
formula for the character of the Verma module, gives you the Weyl character formula. (This is
all from memory: I have some notes in my office and I can check tomorrow.) –
José Figueroa-O'Farrill Oct 27 '10 at 0:10

I would prefer to say, of the Kostant multiplicity formula, which is not the same as the Weyl
character formula; they are Fourier transforms of one another. In particular there is a
manifestly Weyl-invariant way to state the Weyl character formula,
𝑡𝜆
𝑇 𝑟(𝑡|𝑉𝜆 ) = ∑ 𝑤 ⋅ ∏𝛽∈Δ− (1−𝑡𝛽 )
, but not the Kostant multiplicity formula. – Allen Knutson
𝑤∈𝑊
Nov 30 '15 at 3:18

add a comment

The Monster Vertex Algebra (aka the Moonshine Module) categorifies Klein's 𝑗 -
invariant, in the sense that it is a graded vector space whose graded dimension is the 𝑞 -
expansion of 𝑗 − 744 . More generally, vertex operator algebras often categorify
15 modular functions and (quasi-)modular forms. This has something to do with invariance
properties of torus partition functions.

The Monster Lie Algebra categorifies the Koike-Norton-Zagier 𝑗 -function product

identity, in the sense that the Weyl-Kac-Borcherds denominator formula of the Lie
algebra is precisely this identity. More generally, physicists seem to use constructions
with words like "BPS states" and "D-branes" in a way that categorifies automorphic
forms on higher rank orthogonal groups (but I don't how it works).

share cite answered Oct 26 '10 at 2:33 community wiki

improve this answer follow S. Carnahan

1 That's a great example, even for those who act like they don't like categories and
"categorification". – Todd Trimble ♦ Oct 26 '10 at 11:48

add a comment

Grassmannian varieties as categorifying (q-)binomial coefficients.

share cite answered Oct 26 '10 at 1:19 community wiki

14 improve this answer follow Todd Trimble

add a comment

I like one of the simplest and most well known examples: the category of finite sets and
bijections functions (see below for comments) categorifies the natural numbers. Or
rather it un-de-categorifies the de-categorification that led to much of mathematics in the
13 first place. That makes it pretty special, even if it is rather basic compared with other
examples.

share cite edited Oct 27 '10 at 21:27 community wiki

improve this answer follow 2 revisions

9 Isn't it more natural to take all functions as morphisms? The resulting category has initial
objects, terminal objects, finite products, finite coproducts, and an exponential, which
categorify 0, 1, multiplication, addition, and exponentiation respectively. – Qiaochu Yuan Oct
26 '10 at 16:11

1 Quite right - that was a thinko on my part: I have most recently been interested in
groupoidification, although the broader (and older) categorification was the first appeal to me.
However this is a fortuitous illustration of an important point, which is that categorification, like
quantization, is an art, not a functor, and what is "most natural" may depend on the context! If
a set is viewed as a vector space with a canonical basis indexed by that set (or the dual of a
vector space with such a canonical basis) then its groupoidification is a powerful idea in
combinatorics! – David MJC Oct 27 '10 at 21:39

add a comment

Here's an example I learned from Todd Trimble. Recall that the degree 𝑘 part of the
exterior algebra on a vector space 𝑉 of dimension 𝑛 has dimension ( 𝑘) , and similarly
𝑛

the degree 𝑘 part of the symmetric algebra has dimension ( 𝑘 ) = (( 𝑘)) . So one
𝑛+𝑘−1 𝑛
10
can think of these constructions as categorifying binomial coefficients. More precisely,
the exterior algebra categorifies its Hilbert series (1 + 𝑡)𝑛 , and the symmetric algebra
categorifies its Hilbert series 1 𝑛 .
(1−𝑡)

But there's more! The duality between the Hilbert series above manifests itself in the
identity (( 𝑘 )) = (−1)𝑘 ( 𝑘) , which categorifies to the following statement: "the exterior
−𝑛 𝑛

algebra is the symmetric algebra of a purely odd supervector space." So isomorphisms

in the category of supervector spaces categorify identities involving negative binomial
coefficients.

share cite answered Oct 26 '10 at 15:17 community wiki

improve this answer follow Qiaochu Yuan

1 Yes, the degree 1 shift in the super-world can be seen as taking a negative, as I remark in my
recent edit on the classifying space as reciprocal. – Todd Trimble ♦ Oct 26 '10 at 15:55

Qiaochu, could you add this over on my question here: mathoverflow.net/questions/22750/…

? It sounds quite relevant. What are the power series (if there are any natural ones) that have
the other pieces of the twelvefold way as their coefficients? – Zev Chonoles Jan 5 '11 at 19:31

@Zev: I don't think there's much more to say beyond what's in Stanley's answer. I also don't
really think the twelvefold way is the right way to look at the vector space side of things;
quantum mechanics seems to me a much better source of motivation, and it is also relevant
to this supervector space stuff. I discuss this briefly at the end of my most recent blog post:
qchu.wordpress.com/2011/01/02/… – Qiaochu Yuan Jan 5 '11 at 20:16

add a comment

The plethystic monoidal product, or the substitution product of Joyal species, as a

categorification of functional composition.
10 share cite answered Oct 26 '10 at 16:18 community wiki
improve this answer follow Todd Trimble

add a comment

( 𝑛 )𝑡
1 2𝑛 2𝑛
A small example, but I think it's nice. The generating function 𝐶(𝑡)
= ∑𝑛≥0 𝑛+1
of the Catalan numbers is defined by the identity 𝐶(𝑡) = 1 + 𝑡2 𝐶(𝑡)2 . So one might try
9 to find a "Catalan object" in some category satisfying an isomorphism generalizing this
identity. One can take the corresponding combinatorial species in the sense of Joyal, but
another choice is to take the invariant subalgebra of the tensor algebra of the defining
representation of SU(2)!

share cite answered Oct 26 '10 at 0:41 community wiki

improve this answer follow Qiaochu Yuan

add a comment

The empty category is a categorification of the empty set :-))

share cite answered Oct 26 '10 at 10:40 community wiki

8 improve this answer follow Bugs Bunny

add a comment

The sphere spectrum as categorification of the integers, as remarked in a comment of

Thomas Kragh below his answer here, and which I believe is due to Joyal.
5 Hm, that's a lot of answers from me. Should I stop now, or keep going?

share cite edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:58 community wiki

improve this answer follow 2 revs
Todd Trimble

3 No, keep going! Your answers are great, especially 1/g ! – Jan Weidner Oct 26 '10 at 21:55

add a comment

I don't know if I have a favourite either, but here's another one:

crossed modules in 𝐺𝑟𝑝 are strict 2-groups aka group objects in 𝐶𝑎𝑡 aka category
4 objects in 𝐺𝑟𝑝 .

share cite answered Oct 25 '10 at 22:32 community wiki

improve this answer follow David Roberts

add a comment

Of course, my favorite example is the 2-category of 2-tangles (defined below) is a

categorification of the category of tangles. The category of tangles is a monoidal
category with objects that correspond to the non-negative integers, morphisms are
4 ¯ . In this 1-category, the Reidemeister moves (and zig-
generated by | , ∪ , ∩ , 𝑋 and 𝑋
zag and 𝜓 -move) are identities.

In the 2-category of 2-tangles, the 2-morphisms are generated by {} ↔ 𝑂 (birth or

∪
death), | | ↔∩ (saddle), and the aforementioned five Reidemeister moves (I, II, III, zig-
zag, and 𝜓 ). These are subject to the full set of (35 or so) movie moves. The 2-category
of 2-tangles is a braided monoidal 2-category with duals. In fact, it is the free braided
monoidal 2-category with duals on one self-dual object generator (Baez and Langford).

share cite answered Oct 26 '10 at 2:05 community wiki

improve this answer follow Scott Carter

add a comment

Okay then, here's another. 2-Hilbert spaces as a categorification of Hilbert spaces, and
the categorified Gram-Schmidt process (which I first learned from James Dolan).
4 This may be used to derive a ℤ -linear basis for the representation ring of 𝑆𝑛 that
consists of permutation representations, hence a combinatorial alternative to the basis
consisting of irreducible representations. The reference above sketches how this works
in the case 𝑅𝑒𝑝(𝑆4 ) .

share cite answered Oct 27 '10 at 16:17 community wiki

improve this answer follow Todd Trimble

add a comment

The canonical example in my mind is:

Sets ~> vector spaces ~> linear categories

4
This is not so trivial -- it is relevant to the topic of extended TQFTs.

share cite answered Oct 27 '10 at 16:26 community wiki

improve this answer follow Kevin H. Lin

add a comment

The category of groupoids as a categorification of the ring of rational numbers. See this
MO question and this n-category cafe post.
3 share cite edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:58 community wiki
improve this answer follow 2 revs
Steven Gubkin

Relevant to this is . arXiv:1207.6404 "Groupoids and Faa di Bruno formulae for Green
functions in bialgebras of trees" Imma Galvez-Carrillo, Joachim Kock, Andrew Tonks –
Ronnie Brown Sep 11 '15 at 21:13

add a comment

Is it perverse to just quote the original inception by Crane?

An obvious nice collection would be the paper with Yetter on examples of

2 Categorification.

However, I actually like another Paper of Yetter's better in this direction; categorical
linear algebra.

Also, Rosenberg's Noncommutative spectrum is a categorification: pdf-link. Not in the

strict sense, but "morally". That would be undoubtedly my favorite.

share cite answered Oct 26 '10 at 3:06 community wiki

improve this answer follow B. Bischof

1 But what is Rosenberg's reconstruction theorem (morally) a categorification of? –

Todd Trimble ♦ Oct 27 '10 at 0:30

I am saying the spectrum is the categorification of the spectrum in the classical case. By
considering the main object of study R-mod(corresponding to QCsheaves on a scheme) we
make the transition from sets to abelian categories. We replaces our spaces with 'spaces'
which are simply categories. In this sense, it is a categorification. – B. Bischof Oct 27 '10 at
2:50

The proof in this old paper is incomplete (which was first noticed by Gabber). –
Martin Brandenburg Jan 12 '11 at 23:27

add a comment

In my limited experience of categories, I liked Quillen's notion of homotopy fibre (his

paper Higher Algebraic K-Theory I) for a functor between categories modelling the
homotopy fibre of any map.
1
share cite answered Oct 25 '10 at 23:24 community wiki
improve this answer follow Somnath Basu

1 Hmmm... I don't think I know quite what you mean here. Quillen's Theorem B says that when
all the categorical fibers are homotopy equivalent to one another under base change, then
they do indeed all model the homotopy fiber. But if they're not all equivalent, then Theorem B
tells you nothing. In general I think it's a very hard (and unsolved) problem to find a category
whose classifying space is the homotopy fiber of a functor $C\to D$ . On the other hand,
the dual problem of modeling the homotopy colimit of a diagram of categories was solved by
Thomason in his thesis. – Dan Ramras Oct 26 '10 at 0:54

add a comment

Your Answer

Sign up or log in Post as a guest

Name
Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook Email

Required, but never shown

Sign up using Email and Password

Post Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged big-list categorification

examples or ask your own question.

MATHOVERFLOW COMPANY STACK EXCHANGE Blog Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Instagram

NETWORK
Tour Stack Overflow
Technology
Help Stack Overflow Business
Life / Arts
Chat Developer Jobs
Culture / Recreation
Contact About
Science
Feedback Press
Other
Mobile Legal
site design / logo © 2020 Stack Exchange Inc; user contributions
Disable Responsiveness Privacy Policy licensed under cc by-sa. rev 2020.7.10.37208
By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Cookie Policy, Privacy Policy, and our Terms of Service.