Theory MonoidalFunctor
chapter "Monoidal Functor"
text_raw‹
\label{monoidal-functor-chap}
›
theory MonoidalFunctor
imports MonoidalCategory
begin
text ‹
A monoidal functor is a functor @{term F} between monoidal categories @{term C}
and @{term D} that preserves the monoidal structure up to isomorphism.
The traditional definition assumes a monoidal functor to be equipped with
two natural isomorphisms, a natural isomorphism @{term φ} that expresses the preservation
of tensor product and a natural isomorphism @{term ψ} that expresses the preservation
of the unit object. These natural isomorphisms are subject to coherence conditions;
the condition for @{term φ} involving the associator and the conditions for @{term ψ}
involving the unitors. However, as pointed out in \<^cite>‹"Etingof15"› (Section 2.4),
it is not necessary to take the natural isomorphism @{term ψ} as given,
since the mere assumption that @{term "F ℐ⇩C"} is isomorphic to @{term "ℐ⇩D"}
is sufficient for there to be a canonical definition of @{term ψ} from which the
coherence conditions can be derived. This leads to a more economical definition
of monoidal functor, which is the one we adopt here.
›
locale monoidal_functor =
C: monoidal_category C T⇩C α⇩C ι⇩C +
D: monoidal_category D T⇩D α⇩D ι⇩D +
"functor" C D F +
CC: product_category C C +
DD: product_category D D +
FF: product_functor C C D D F F +
FoT⇩C: composite_functor C.CC.comp C D T⇩C F +
T⇩DoFF: composite_functor C.CC.comp D.CC.comp D FF.map T⇩D +
φ: natural_isomorphism C.CC.comp D T⇩DoFF.map FoT⇩C.map φ
for C :: "'c comp" (infixr "⋅⇩C" 55)
and T⇩C :: "'c * 'c ⇒ 'c"
and α⇩C :: "'c * 'c * 'c ⇒ 'c"
and ι⇩C :: "'c"
and D :: "'d comp" (infixr "⋅⇩D" 55)
and T⇩D :: "'d * 'd ⇒ 'd"
and α⇩D :: "'d * 'd * 'd ⇒ 'd"
and ι⇩D :: "'d"
and F :: "'c ⇒ 'd"
and φ :: "'c * 'c ⇒ 'd" +
assumes preserves_unity: "D.isomorphic D.unity (F C.unity)"
and assoc_coherence:
"⟦ C.ide a; C.ide b; C.ide c ⟧ ⟹
F (α⇩C (a, b, c)) ⋅⇩D φ (T⇩C (a, b), c) ⋅⇩D T⇩D (φ (a, b), F c)
= φ (a, T⇩C (b, c)) ⋅⇩D T⇩D (F a, φ (b, c)) ⋅⇩D α⇩D (F a, F b, F c)"
begin
notation C.tensor (infixr "⊗⇩C" 53)
and C.unity ("ℐ⇩C")
and C.lunit ("𝗅⇩C[_]")
and C.runit ("𝗋⇩C[_]")
and C.assoc ("𝖺⇩C[_, _, _]")
and D.tensor (infixr "⊗⇩D" 53)
and D.unity ("ℐ⇩D")
and D.lunit ("𝗅⇩D[_]")
and D.runit ("𝗋⇩D[_]")
and D.assoc ("𝖺⇩D[_, _, _]")
lemma φ_in_hom:
assumes "C.ide a" and "C.ide b"
shows "«φ (a, b) : F a ⊗⇩D F b →⇩D F (a ⊗⇩C b)»"
using assms by auto
text ‹
We wish to exhibit a canonical definition of an isomorphism
@{term "ψ ∈ D.hom ℐ⇩D (F ℐ⇩C)"} that satisfies certain coherence conditions that
involve the left and right unitors. In \<^cite>‹"Etingof15"›, the isomorphism @{term ψ}
is defined by the equation @{term "𝗅⇩D[F ℐ⇩C] = F 𝗅⇩C[ℐ⇩C] ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C) ⋅⇩D (ψ ⊗⇩D F ℐ⇩C)"},
which suffices for the definition because the functor ‹- ⊗⇩D F ℐ⇩C› is fully faithful.
It is then asserted (Proposition 2.4.3) that the coherence condition
@{term "𝗅⇩D[F a] = F 𝗅⇩C[a] ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, a) ⋅⇩D (ψ ⊗⇩D F a)"} is satisfied for any object @{term a}
of ‹C›, as well as the corresponding condition for the right unitor.
However, the proof is left as an exercise (Exercise 2.4.4).
The organization of the presentation suggests that that one should derive the
general coherence condition from the special case
@{term "𝗅⇩D[F ℐ⇩C] = F 𝗅⇩C[ℐ⇩C] ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C) ⋅⇩D (ψ ⊗⇩D F ℐ⇩C)"} used as the definition of @{term ψ}.
However, I did not see how to do it that way, so I used a different approach.
The isomorphism @{term "ι⇩D' ≡ F ι⇩C ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C)"} serves as an alternative unit for the
monoidal category ‹D›. There is consequently a unique isomorphism that maps
@{term "ι⇩D"} to @{term "ι⇩D'"}. We define @{term ψ} to be this isomorphism and then use
the definition to establish the desired coherence conditions.
›
abbreviation ι⇩1
where "ι⇩1 ≡ F ι⇩C ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C)"
lemma ι⇩1_in_hom:
shows "«ι⇩1 : F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D F ℐ⇩C →⇩D F ℐ⇩C»"
using C.unit_in_hom by (intro D.in_homI, auto)
lemma ι⇩1_is_iso:
shows "D.iso ι⇩1"
using C.unit_is_iso C.unit_in_hom φ_in_hom D.isos_compose by auto
interpretation D: monoidal_category_with_alternate_unit D T⇩D α⇩D ι⇩D ι⇩1
proof -
have 1: "∃ψ. «ψ : F ℐ⇩C →⇩D ℐ⇩D» ∧ D.iso ψ"
proof -
obtain ψ' where ψ': "«ψ' : ℐ⇩D →⇩D F ℐ⇩C» ∧ D.iso ψ'"
using preserves_unity by auto
have "«D.inv ψ' : F ℐ⇩C →⇩D ℐ⇩D» ∧ D.iso (D.inv ψ')"
using ψ' by simp
thus ?thesis by auto
qed
obtain ψ where ψ: "«ψ : F ℐ⇩C →⇩D ℐ⇩D» ∧ D.iso ψ"
using 1 by blast
interpret L: equivalence_functor D D ‹λf. (D.cod ι⇩1) ⊗⇩D f›
proof -
interpret L: "functor" D D ‹λf. (F ℐ⇩C) ⊗⇩D f›
using D.T.fixing_ide_gives_functor_1 by simp
interpret L: endofunctor D ‹λf. (F ℐ⇩C) ⊗⇩D f› ..
interpret ψx: natural_transformation D D ‹λf. (F ℐ⇩C) ⊗⇩D f› ‹λf. ℐ⇩D ⊗⇩D f›
‹λf. ψ ⊗⇩D f›
using ψ D.T.fixing_arr_gives_natural_transformation_1 [of ψ] by auto
interpret ψx: natural_isomorphism D D ‹λf. (F ℐ⇩C) ⊗⇩D f› ‹λf. ℐ⇩D ⊗⇩D f› ‹λf. ψ ⊗⇩D f›
apply unfold_locales using ψ D.tensor_preserves_iso by simp
interpret 𝔩⇩Doψx: vertical_composite D D ‹λf. (F ℐ⇩C) ⊗⇩D f› ‹λf. ℐ⇩D ⊗⇩D f› D.map
‹λf. ψ ⊗⇩D f› D.𝔩 ..
interpret 𝔩⇩Doψx: natural_isomorphism D D ‹λf. (F ℐ⇩C) ⊗⇩D f› D.map 𝔩⇩Doψx.map
using ψx.natural_isomorphism_axioms D.𝔩.natural_isomorphism_axioms
natural_isomorphisms_compose by blast
interpret L: equivalence_functor D D ‹λf. (F ℐ⇩C) ⊗⇩D f›
using L.isomorphic_to_identity_is_equivalence 𝔩⇩Doψx.natural_isomorphism_axioms
by simp
show "equivalence_functor D D (λf. (D.cod ι⇩1) ⊗⇩D f)"
using L.equivalence_functor_axioms C.unit_in_hom by auto
qed
interpret R: equivalence_functor D D ‹λf. T⇩D (f, D.cod ι⇩1)›
proof -
interpret R: "functor" D D ‹λf. T⇩D (f, F ℐ⇩C)›
using D.T.fixing_ide_gives_functor_2 by simp
interpret R: endofunctor D ‹λf. T⇩D (f, F ℐ⇩C)› ..
interpret xψ: natural_transformation D D ‹λf. f ⊗⇩D (F ℐ⇩C)› ‹λf. f ⊗⇩D ℐ⇩D›
‹λf. f ⊗⇩D ψ›
using ψ D.T.fixing_arr_gives_natural_transformation_2 [of ψ] by auto
interpret xψ: natural_isomorphism D D ‹λf. f ⊗⇩D (F ℐ⇩C)› ‹λf. f ⊗⇩D ℐ⇩D› ‹λf. f ⊗⇩D ψ›
using ψ D.tensor_preserves_iso by (unfold_locales, simp)
interpret ρ⇩Doxψ: vertical_composite D D ‹λf. f ⊗⇩D (F ℐ⇩C)› ‹λf. f ⊗⇩D ℐ⇩D› D.map
‹λf. f ⊗⇩D ψ› D.ρ ..
interpret ρ⇩Doxψ: natural_isomorphism D D ‹λf. f ⊗⇩D (F ℐ⇩C)› D.map ρ⇩Doxψ.map
using xψ.natural_isomorphism_axioms D.ρ.natural_isomorphism_axioms
natural_isomorphisms_compose by blast
interpret R: equivalence_functor D D ‹λf. f ⊗⇩D (F ℐ⇩C)›
using R.isomorphic_to_identity_is_equivalence ρ⇩Doxψ.natural_isomorphism_axioms
by simp
show "equivalence_functor D D (λf. f ⊗⇩D (D.cod ι⇩1))"
using R.equivalence_functor_axioms C.unit_in_hom by auto
qed
show "monoidal_category_with_alternate_unit D T⇩D α⇩D ι⇩D ι⇩1"
using D.pentagon C.unit_is_iso C.unit_in_hom preserves_hom ι⇩1_is_iso ι⇩1_in_hom
by (unfold_locales, auto)
qed
no_notation D.tensor (infixr "⊗⇩D" 53)
notation D.C⇩1.tensor (infixr "⊗⇩D" 53)
no_notation D.assoc ("𝖺⇩D[_, _, _]")
notation D.C⇩1.assoc ("𝖺⇩D[_, _, _]")
no_notation D.assoc' ("𝖺⇩D⇧-⇧1[_, _, _]")
notation D.C⇩1.assoc' ("𝖺⇩D⇧-⇧1[_, _, _]")
notation D.C⇩1.unity ("ℐ⇩1")
notation D.C⇩1.lunit ("𝗅⇩1[_]")
notation D.C⇩1.runit ("𝗋⇩1[_]")
lemma ℐ⇩1_char [simp]:
shows "ℐ⇩1 = F ℐ⇩C"
using ι⇩1_in_hom by auto
definition ψ
where "ψ ≡ THE ψ. «ψ : ℐ⇩D →⇩D F ℐ⇩C» ∧ D.iso ψ ∧ ψ ⋅⇩D ι⇩D = ι⇩1 ⋅⇩D (ψ ⊗⇩D ψ)"
lemma ψ_char:
shows "«ψ : ℐ⇩D →⇩D F ℐ⇩C»" and "D.iso ψ" and "ψ ⋅⇩D ι⇩D = ι⇩1 ⋅⇩D (ψ ⊗⇩D ψ)"
and "∃!ψ. «ψ : ℐ⇩D →⇩D F ℐ⇩C» ∧ D.iso ψ ∧ ψ ⋅⇩D ι⇩D = ι⇩1 ⋅⇩D (ψ ⊗⇩D ψ)"
proof -
show "∃!ψ. «ψ : ℐ⇩D →⇩D F ℐ⇩C» ∧ D.iso ψ ∧ ψ ⋅⇩D ι⇩D = ι⇩1 ⋅⇩D (ψ ⊗⇩D ψ)"
using D.unit_unique_upto_unique_iso ι⇩1_in_hom
by (elim D.in_homE, auto)
hence 1: "«ψ : ℐ⇩D →⇩D F ℐ⇩C» ∧ D.iso ψ ∧ ψ ⋅⇩D ι⇩D = ι⇩1 ⋅⇩D (ψ ⊗⇩D ψ)"
unfolding ψ_def
using theI' [of "λψ. «ψ : ℐ⇩D →⇩D F ℐ⇩C» ∧ D.iso ψ ∧ ψ ⋅⇩D ι⇩D = ι⇩1 ⋅⇩D (ψ ⊗⇩D ψ)"]
by fast
show "«ψ : ℐ⇩D →⇩D F ℐ⇩C»" using 1 by simp
show "D.iso ψ" using 1 by simp
show "ψ ⋅⇩D ι⇩D = ι⇩1 ⋅⇩D (ψ ⊗⇩D ψ)" using 1 by simp
qed
lemma ψ_eqI:
assumes "«f: ℐ⇩D →⇩D F ℐ⇩C»" and "D.iso f" and "f ⋅⇩D ι⇩D = ι⇩1 ⋅⇩D (f ⊗⇩D f)"
shows "f = ψ"
using assms ψ_def ψ_char
the1_equality [of "λf. «f: ℐ⇩D →⇩D F ℐ⇩C» ∧ D.iso f ∧ f ⋅⇩D ι⇩D = ι⇩1 ⋅⇩D (f ⊗⇩D f)" f]
by simp
lemma lunit_coherence1:
assumes "C.ide a"
shows "𝗅⇩1[F a] ⋅⇩D (ψ ⊗⇩D F a) = 𝗅⇩D[F a]"
proof -
have "D.par (𝗅⇩1[F a] ⋅⇩D (ψ ⊗⇩D F a)) 𝗅⇩D[F a]"
using assms D.C⇩1.lunit_in_hom D.tensor_in_hom D.lunit_in_hom ψ_char(1)
by auto
text ‹
The upper left triangle in the following diagram commutes.
›
text ‹
\newcommand\xIc{{\cal I}}
\newcommand\xId{{\cal I}}
\newcommand\xac[3]{{\scriptsize ‹𝖺›}[{#1},{#2},{#3}]}
\newcommand\xad[3]{{\scriptsize ‹𝖺›}[{#1},{#2},{#3}]}
\newcommand\xlc[1]{{\scriptsize ‹𝗅›}[{#1}]}
\newcommand\xld[1]{{\scriptsize ‹𝗅›}[{#1}]}
\newcommand\xldp[1]{{\scriptsize ‹𝗅›}_1[{#1}]}
$$\xymatrix{
{\xId\otimes F a}
\ar[rrr]^{\psi\otimes F a}
& & &
{F\xIc\otimes F a}
\\
&
{\xId\otimes(F\xIc \otimes F a)}
\ar[ul]_{\xId\otimes\xldp{F a}}
\ar[ddr]^{\psi\otimes(F\xIc\otimes F a)}
\\ \\
&
{\xId\otimes(\xId \otimes F a)}
\ar[r]_{\psi\otimes(\psi\otimes F a)}
\ar[uuul]^{\xId\otimes\xld{F a}}
\ar[uu]_{\xId\otimes(\psi\otimes F a)}
&
{F\xIc\otimes (F\xIc\otimes F a)}
\ar[uuur]^{F\xIc\otimes\xldp{F a}}
\\ \\
{(\xId\otimes\xId)\otimes F a}
\ar[uuuuu]^{\iota\otimes F a}
\ar[uur]_{\xad{\xId}{\xId}{F a}}
\ar[rrr]^{(\psi\otimes\psi)\otimes F a}
& & &
{(F\xIc\otimes F\xIc)\otimes F a}
\ar[uuuuu]_{\iota_1\otimes F a}
\ar[uul]^{\xad{F\xIc}{F\xIc}{F a}}
}$$
›
moreover have "(ℐ⇩D ⊗⇩D 𝗅⇩1[F a]) ⋅⇩D (ℐ⇩D ⊗⇩D ψ ⊗⇩D F a) = ℐ⇩D ⊗⇩D 𝗅⇩D[F a]"
proof -
have "(ℐ⇩D ⊗⇩D 𝗅⇩1[F a]) ⋅⇩D (ℐ⇩D ⊗⇩D ψ ⊗⇩D F a)
= (ℐ⇩D ⊗⇩D 𝗅⇩1[F a]) ⋅⇩D (D.inv ψ ⊗⇩D F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D F a) ⋅⇩D (ψ ⊗⇩D ψ ⊗⇩D F a)"
using assms ψ_char(1-2) D.interchange [of "D.inv ψ"] D.comp_cod_arr
D.inv_is_inverse D.comp_inv_arr
by (elim D.in_homE, simp)
also have "... = (D.inv ψ ⊗⇩D F a) ⋅⇩D (F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D 𝗅⇩1[F a]) ⋅⇩D (ψ ⊗⇩D ψ ⊗⇩D F a)"
proof -
have "(ℐ⇩D ⊗⇩D 𝗅⇩1[F a]) ⋅⇩D (D.inv ψ ⊗⇩D F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D F a) =
(D.inv ψ ⊗⇩D F a) ⋅⇩D (F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D 𝗅⇩1[F a])"
using assms ψ_char(1-2) D.interchange [of "ℐ⇩D"] D.interchange [of "D.inv ψ"]
D.comp_arr_dom D.comp_cod_arr
by (elim D.in_homE, auto)
thus ?thesis
using assms ψ_char(1-2) D.inv_in_hom
D.comp_permute [of "ℐ⇩D ⊗⇩D 𝗅⇩1[F a]" "D.inv ψ ⊗⇩D F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D F a"
"D.inv ψ ⊗⇩D F a" "F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D 𝗅⇩1[F a]"]
by (elim D.in_homE, auto)
qed
also have "... = (D.inv ψ ⊗⇩D F a) ⋅⇩D (ι⇩1 ⊗⇩D F a) ⋅⇩D D.inv 𝖺⇩D[F ℐ⇩C, F ℐ⇩C, F a] ⋅⇩D
(ψ ⊗⇩D ψ ⊗⇩D F a)"
using assms ψ_char(1-2) D.C⇩1.lunit_char(2) D.comp_assoc by auto
also have "... = ((D.inv ψ ⊗⇩D F a) ⋅⇩D (ι⇩1 ⊗⇩D F a) ⋅⇩D ((ψ ⊗⇩D ψ) ⊗⇩D F a)) ⋅⇩D
D.inv 𝖺⇩D[ℐ⇩D, ℐ⇩D, F a]"
using assms ψ_char(1-2) D.assoc'_naturality [of ψ ψ "F a"] D.comp_assoc by auto
also have "... = (ι⇩D ⊗⇩D F a) ⋅⇩D D.inv 𝖺⇩D[ℐ⇩D, ℐ⇩D, F a]"
proof -
have "(D.inv ψ ⊗⇩D F a) ⋅⇩D (ι⇩1 ⊗⇩D F a) ⋅⇩D ((ψ ⊗⇩D ψ) ⊗⇩D F a) = ι⇩D ⊗⇩D F a"
proof -
have "(D.inv ψ ⊗⇩D F a) ⋅⇩D (ι⇩1 ⊗⇩D F a) ⋅⇩D ((ψ ⊗⇩D ψ) ⊗⇩D F a) =
D.inv ψ ⋅⇩D ψ ⋅⇩D ι⇩D ⊗⇩D F a"
using assms ψ_char(1-3) ι⇩1_in_hom D.interchange
by (elim D.in_homE, auto)
also have "... = ι⇩D ⊗⇩D F a"
using assms ψ_char(1-2) D.inv_is_inverse D.comp_inv_arr D.comp_cod_arr
D.comp_reduce D.unit_in_hom
by (elim D.in_homE, auto)
finally show ?thesis by blast
qed
thus ?thesis by simp
qed
also have "... = ℐ⇩D ⊗⇩D 𝗅⇩D[F a]"
using assms D.lunit_char by simp
finally show ?thesis by blast
qed
ultimately show ?thesis
using D.L.is_faithful [of "𝗅⇩1[F a] ⋅⇩D (ψ ⊗⇩D F a)" "𝗅⇩D[F a]"] by force
qed
lemma lunit_coherence2:
assumes "C.ide a"
shows "F 𝗅⇩C[a] ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, a) = 𝗅⇩1[F a]"
proof -
text ‹
We show that the lower left triangle in the following diagram commutes.
›
text ‹
\newcommand\xIc{{\cal I}}
\newcommand\xId{{\cal I}}
\newcommand\xac[3]{{\scriptsize ‹𝖺›}[{#1},{#2},{#3}]}
\newcommand\xad[3]{{\scriptsize ‹𝖺›}[{#1},{#2},{#3}]}
\newcommand\xlc[1]{{\scriptsize ‹𝗅›}[{#1}]}
\newcommand\xld[1]{{\scriptsize ‹𝗅›}[{#1}]}
\newcommand\xldp[1]{{\scriptsize ‹𝗅›}_1[{#1}]}
$$\xymatrix{
{(F\xIc\otimes F\xIc)\otimes F a}
\ar[rrrrr]^{\phi(\xIc,\xIc)\otimes F a}
\ar[ddd]_{\xad{F\xIc}{F\xIc}{Fa}}
\ar[dddrr]^{\iota_1\otimes F a}
&&&&&{F(\xIc\otimes\xIc)\otimes F a}
\ar[ddd]^{\phi(\xIc\otimes\xIc, a)}
\ar[dddlll]_{F\iota\otimes F a}
\\ \\ \\
{F\xIc\otimes(F\xIc\otimes F a)}
\ar[ddd]_{F\xIc\otimes\phi(\xIc, a)}
\ar[rr]_{F\xIc\otimes\xldp{Fa}}
&&{F\xIc\otimes F a}
\ar[r]_{\phi(\xIc, a)}
&{F(\xIc\otimes a)}
&&{F((\xIc\otimes\xIc)\otimes a)}
\ar[ddd]^{F\xac{\xIc}{\xIc}{a}}
\ar[ll]^{F(\iota\otimes a)}
\\ \\ \\
{F\xIc\otimes F (\xIc\otimes a)}
\ar[rrrrr]_{\phi(\xIc, \xIc\otimes a)}
\ar[uuurr]_{F\xIc\otimes F\xlc{a}}
&&&&&{F(\xIc\otimes (\xIc \otimes a))}
\ar[uuull]^{F(\xIc\otimes\xlc{a})}
}$$
›
have "(F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D F 𝗅⇩C[a]) ⋅⇩D (F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, a)) = F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D 𝗅⇩1[F a]"
proof -
have "(F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D F 𝗅⇩C[a]) ⋅⇩D (F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, a))
= (F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D F 𝗅⇩C[a]) ⋅⇩D D.inv (φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C a)) ⋅⇩D F 𝖺⇩C[ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C, a] ⋅⇩D
φ (ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C ℐ⇩C, a) ⋅⇩D (φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C) ⊗⇩D F a) ⋅⇩D D.inv 𝖺⇩D[F ℐ⇩C, F ℐ⇩C, F a]"
proof -
have "D.inv (φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C a)) ⋅⇩D F 𝖺⇩C[ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C, a] ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C ℐ⇩C, a) ⋅⇩D
(φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C) ⊗⇩D F a)
= (F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, a)) ⋅⇩D 𝖺⇩D[F ℐ⇩C, F ℐ⇩C, F a]"
using assms φ_in_hom assoc_coherence D.invert_side_of_triangle(1) by simp
hence "F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, a)
= (D.inv (φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C a)) ⋅⇩D F 𝖺⇩C[ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C, a] ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C ℐ⇩C, a) ⋅⇩D
(φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C) ⊗⇩D F a)) ⋅⇩D D.inv 𝖺⇩D[F ℐ⇩C, F ℐ⇩C, F a]"
using assms φ_in_hom D.invert_side_of_triangle(2) by simp
thus ?thesis
using D.comp_assoc by simp
qed
also have "... = (F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D F 𝗅⇩C[a]) ⋅⇩D D.inv (φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C a)) ⋅⇩D
(D.inv (F (ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C 𝗅⇩C[a])) ⋅⇩D F (ι⇩C ⊗⇩C a)) ⋅⇩D
φ (ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C ℐ⇩C, a) ⋅⇩D (φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C) ⊗⇩D F a) ⋅⇩D
D.inv 𝖺⇩D[F ℐ⇩C, F ℐ⇩C, F a]"
proof -
have 1: "F (ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C 𝗅⇩C[a]) = F (ι⇩C ⊗⇩C a) ⋅⇩D D.inv (F 𝖺⇩C[ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C, a])"
using assms C.lunit_char(1-2) C.unit_in_hom preserves_inv by auto
hence "F 𝖺⇩C[ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C, a] = D.inv (F (ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C 𝗅⇩C[a])) ⋅⇩D F (ι⇩C ⊗⇩C a)"
proof -
have "F 𝖺⇩C[ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C, a] ⋅⇩D D.inv (F (ι⇩C ⊗⇩C a))
= D.inv (F (ι⇩C ⊗⇩C a) ⋅⇩D D.inv (F 𝖺⇩C[ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C ,a]))"
using assms 1 preserves_iso C.ide_is_iso C.unit_is_iso C.ide_unity C.iso_assoc
C.iso_lunit C.tensor_preserves_iso D.inv_comp D.inv_inv
D.iso_inv_iso D.iso_is_arr
by metis
thus ?thesis
using assms 1 preserves_iso C.ide_is_iso C.unit_is_iso C.ide_unity C.iso_assoc
C.iso_lunit C.tensor_preserves_iso D.inv_comp D.inv_inv
D.iso_inv_iso D.iso_is_arr D.invert_side_of_triangle(2)
by metis
qed
thus ?thesis by argo
qed
also have "... = (F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D F 𝗅⇩C[a]) ⋅⇩D D.inv (φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C a)) ⋅⇩D
D.inv (F (ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C 𝗅⇩C[a])) ⋅⇩D (F (ι⇩C ⊗⇩C a) ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C ℐ⇩C, a)) ⋅⇩D
(φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C) ⊗⇩D F a) ⋅⇩D D.inv 𝖺⇩D[F ℐ⇩C, F ℐ⇩C, F a]"
using D.comp_assoc by auto
also have "... = (F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D F 𝗅⇩C[a]) ⋅⇩D D.inv (φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C a)) ⋅⇩D
D.inv (F (ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C 𝗅⇩C[a])) ⋅⇩D (φ (ℐ⇩C, a) ⋅⇩D (F ι⇩C ⊗⇩D F a)) ⋅⇩D
(φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C) ⊗⇩D F a) ⋅⇩D D.inv 𝖺⇩D[F ℐ⇩C, F ℐ⇩C, F a]"
using assms φ.naturality [of "(ι⇩C, a)"] C.unit_in_hom by auto
also have "... = (F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D F 𝗅⇩C[a]) ⋅⇩D D.inv (φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C a)) ⋅⇩D
D.inv (F (ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C 𝗅⇩C[a])) ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, a) ⋅⇩D
((F ι⇩C ⊗⇩D F a) ⋅⇩D (φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C) ⊗⇩D F a)) ⋅⇩D
D.inv 𝖺⇩D[F ℐ⇩C, F ℐ⇩C, F a]"
using D.comp_assoc by auto
also have "... = (F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D F 𝗅⇩C[a]) ⋅⇩D D.inv (φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C a)) ⋅⇩D
D.inv (F (ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C 𝗅⇩C[a])) ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, a) ⋅⇩D (ι⇩1 ⊗⇩D F a) ⋅⇩D
D.inv 𝖺⇩D[F ℐ⇩C, F ℐ⇩C, F a]"
using assms D.interchange C.unit_in_hom by auto
also have "... = (F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D F 𝗅⇩C[a]) ⋅⇩D D.inv (φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C a)) ⋅⇩D
D.inv (F (ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C 𝗅⇩C[a])) ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, a) ⋅⇩D
((F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D 𝗅⇩1[F a]) ⋅⇩D 𝖺⇩D[F ℐ⇩C, F ℐ⇩C, F a]) ⋅⇩D
D.inv 𝖺⇩D[F ℐ⇩C, F ℐ⇩C, F a]"
proof -
have "(ι⇩1 ⊗⇩D F a) ⋅⇩D 𝖺⇩D⇧-⇧1[F ℐ⇩C, F ℐ⇩C, F a] = F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D 𝗅⇩1[F a]"
using assms D.C⇩1.lunit_char [of "F a"] by auto
thus ?thesis
using assms D.inv_is_inverse ι⇩1_in_hom φ_in_hom D.invert_side_of_triangle(2)
by simp
qed
also have "... = (F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D F 𝗅⇩C[a]) ⋅⇩D
(D.inv (φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C a)) ⋅⇩D D.inv (F (ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C 𝗅⇩C[a])) ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, a)) ⋅⇩D
(F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D 𝗅⇩1[F a])"
using assms D.comp_arr_dom [of "F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D 𝗅⇩1[F a]"] D.comp_assoc by auto
also have "... = (F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D F 𝗅⇩C[a]) ⋅⇩D D.inv (F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D F 𝗅⇩C[a]) ⋅⇩D (F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D 𝗅⇩1[F a])"
proof -
have "D.inv (F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D F 𝗅⇩C[a])
= D.inv (D.inv (φ (ℐ⇩C, a)) ⋅⇩D F (ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C 𝗅⇩C[a]) ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C a))"
using assms φ.naturality [of "(ℐ⇩C, 𝗅⇩C[a])"] D.invert_side_of_triangle(1) by simp
also have "... = D.inv (φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C a)) ⋅⇩D D.inv (F (ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C 𝗅⇩C[a])) ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, a)"
using assms D.inv_comp D.inv_is_inverse D.isos_compose D.comp_assoc
by simp
finally have "D.inv (F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D F 𝗅⇩C[a])
= D.inv (φ (ℐ⇩C, ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C a)) ⋅⇩D D.inv (F (ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C 𝗅⇩C[a])) ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, a)"
by blast
thus ?thesis by argo
qed
also have "... = ((F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D F 𝗅⇩C[a]) ⋅⇩D D.inv (F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D F 𝗅⇩C[a])) ⋅⇩D (F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D 𝗅⇩1[F a])"
using assms D.tensor_preserves_iso D.comp_assoc by simp
also have "... = F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D 𝗅⇩1[F a]"
using assms D.tensor_preserves_iso D.comp_arr_inv D.inv_is_inverse D.comp_cod_arr
D.interchange
by simp
finally show ?thesis by blast
qed
hence "F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D F 𝗅⇩C[a] ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, a) = F ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩D 𝗅⇩1[F a]"
using assms φ_in_hom D.interchange by simp
moreover have "D.par (F 𝗅⇩C[a] ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, a)) 𝗅⇩1[F a]"
using assms φ_in_hom by simp
ultimately show ?thesis
using D.C⇩1.L.is_faithful [of "F 𝗅⇩C[a] ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, a)" "𝗅⇩1[F a]"] by simp
qed
text ‹
Combining the two previous lemmas yields the coherence result we seek.
This is the condition that is traditionally taken as part of the definition
of monoidal functor.
›
lemma lunit_coherence:
assumes "C.ide a"
shows "𝗅⇩D[F a] = F 𝗅⇩C[a] ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, a) ⋅⇩D (ψ ⊗⇩D F a)"
proof -
have "𝗅⇩D[F a] ⋅⇩D D.inv (ψ ⊗⇩D F a) = 𝗅⇩1[F a]"
using assms lunit_coherence1 ψ_char(2)
D.invert_side_of_triangle(2) [of "𝗅⇩D[F a]" "𝗅⇩1[F a]" "ψ ⊗⇩D F a"]
by auto
also have "... = F 𝗅⇩C[a] ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, a)"
using assms lunit_coherence2 by simp
finally have "𝗅⇩D[F a] ⋅⇩D D.inv (ψ ⊗⇩D F a) = F 𝗅⇩C[a] ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, a)"
by blast
hence "𝗅⇩D[F a] = (F 𝗅⇩C[a] ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, a)) ⋅⇩D (ψ ⊗⇩D F a)"
using assms ψ_char(2) φ_in_hom
D.invert_side_of_triangle(2) [of "F 𝗅⇩C[a] ⋅⇩D φ (ℐ⇩C, a)" "𝗅⇩D[F a]" "D.inv (ψ ⊗⇩D F a)"]
by simp
thus ?thesis
using assms ψ_char(1) D.comp_assoc by auto
qed
text ‹
We now want to obtain the corresponding result for the right unitor.
To avoid a repetition of what would amount to essentially the same tedious diagram chases
that were carried out above, we instead show here that @{term F} becomes a monoidal functor
from the opposite of ‹C› to the opposite of ‹D›,
with @{term "λf. φ (snd f, fst f)"} as the structure map.
The fact that in the opposite monoidal categories the left and right unitors are exchanged
then permits us to obtain the result for the right unitor from the result already proved
for the left unitor.
›
interpretation C': opposite_monoidal_category C T⇩C α⇩C ι⇩C ..
interpretation D': opposite_monoidal_category D T⇩D α⇩D ι⇩D ..
interpretation T⇩D'oFF: composite_functor C.CC.comp D.CC.comp D FF.map D'.T ..
interpretation FoT⇩C': composite_functor C.CC.comp C D C'.T F ..
interpretation φ': natural_transformation C.CC.comp D T⇩D'oFF.map FoT⇩C'.map
‹λf. φ (snd f, fst f)›
using φ.is_natural_1 φ.is_natural_2 φ.is_extensional by (unfold_locales, auto)
interpretation φ': natural_isomorphism C.CC.comp D T⇩D'oFF.map FoT⇩C'.map
‹λf. φ (snd f, fst f)›
by (unfold_locales, simp)
interpretation F': monoidal_functor C C'.T C'.α ι⇩C D D'.T D'.α ι⇩D F ‹λf. φ (snd f, fst f)›
using preserves_unity apply (unfold_locales; simp)
proof -
fix a b c
assume a: "C.ide a" and b: "C.ide b" and c: "C.ide c"
have "(φ (c ⊗⇩C b, a) ⋅⇩D (φ (c, b) ⊗⇩D F a)) ⋅⇩D 𝖺⇩D⇧-⇧1[F c, F b, F a] =
F (C.assoc' c b a) ⋅⇩D φ (c, b ⊗⇩C a) ⋅⇩D (F c ⊗⇩D φ (b, a))"
proof -
have "D.seq (F 𝖺⇩C[c, b, a]) (φ (c ⊗⇩C b, a) ⋅⇩D (φ (c, b) ⊗⇩D F a))"
using a b c φ_in_hom by simp
moreover have "D.seq (φ (c, b ⊗⇩C a) ⋅⇩D (F c ⊗⇩D φ (b, a))) 𝖺⇩D[F c, F b, F a]"
using a b c φ_in_hom by simp
moreover have
"F 𝖺⇩C[c, b, a] ⋅⇩D φ (c ⊗⇩C b, a) ⋅⇩D (φ (c, b) ⊗⇩D F a) =
(φ (c, b ⊗⇩C a) ⋅⇩D (F c ⊗⇩D φ (b, a))) ⋅⇩D 𝖺⇩D[F c, F b, F a]"
using a b c assoc_coherence D.comp_assoc by simp
moreover have "D.iso (F 𝖺⇩C[c,b,a])"
using a b c by simp
moreover have "D.iso 𝖺⇩D[F c, F b, F a]"
using a b c by simp
moreover have "D.inv (F 𝖺⇩C[c,b,a]) = F (C.assoc' c b a)"
using a b c preserves_inv by simp
ultimately show ?thesis
using D.invert_opposite_sides_of_square by simp
qed
thus "F (C.assoc' c b a) ⋅⇩D φ (c, b ⊗⇩C a) ⋅⇩D (F c ⊗⇩D φ (b, a)) =
φ (c ⊗⇩C b, a) ⋅⇩D (φ (c, b) ⊗⇩D F a) ⋅⇩D 𝖺⇩D⇧-⇧1[F c, F b, F a]"
using D.comp_assoc by simp
qed
lemma induces_monoidal_functor_between_opposites:
shows "monoidal_functor C C'.T C'.α ι⇩C D D'.T D'.α ι⇩D F (λf. φ (snd f, fst f))"
..
lemma runit_coherence:
assumes "C.ide a"
shows "𝗋⇩D[F a] = F 𝗋⇩C[a] ⋅⇩D φ (a, ℐ⇩C) ⋅⇩D (F a ⊗⇩D ψ)"
proof -
have "C'.lunit a = 𝗋⇩C[a]"
using assms C'.lunit_simp by simp
moreover have "D'.lunit (F a) = 𝗋⇩D[F a]"
using assms D'.lunit_simp by simp
moreover have "F'.ψ = ψ"
proof (intro ψ_eqI)
show "«F'.ψ : D'.unity →⇩D F C'.unity»" using F'.ψ_char(1) by simp
show "D.iso F'.ψ" using F'.ψ_char(2) by simp
show "F'.ψ ⋅⇩D ι⇩D = ι⇩1 ⋅⇩D (F'.ψ ⊗⇩D F'.ψ)" using F'.ψ_char(3) by simp
qed
moreover have "D'.lunit (F a) = F (C'.lunit a) ⋅⇩D φ (a, C'.unity) ⋅⇩D (F a ⊗⇩D F'.ψ)"
using assms F'.lunit_coherence by simp
ultimately show ?thesis by simp
qed
end
section "Strict Monoidal Functor"
text ‹
A strict monoidal functor preserves the monoidal structure ``on the nose''.
›
locale strict_monoidal_functor =
C: monoidal_category C T⇩C α⇩C ι⇩C +
D: monoidal_category D T⇩D α⇩D ι⇩D +
"functor" C D F
for C :: "'c comp" (infixr "⋅⇩C" 55)
and T⇩C :: "'c * 'c ⇒ 'c"
and α⇩C :: "'c * 'c * 'c ⇒ 'c"
and ι⇩C :: "'c"
and D :: "'d comp" (infixr "⋅⇩D" 55)
and T⇩D :: "'d * 'd ⇒ 'd"
and α⇩D :: "'d * 'd * 'd ⇒ 'd"
and ι⇩D :: "'d"
and F :: "'c ⇒ 'd" +
assumes strictly_preserves_ι: "F ι⇩C = ι⇩D"
and strictly_preserves_T: "⟦ C.arr f; C.arr g ⟧ ⟹ F (T⇩C (f, g)) = T⇩D (F f, F g)"
and strictly_preserves_α_ide: "⟦ C.ide a; C.ide b; C.ide c ⟧ ⟹
F (α⇩C (a, b, c)) = α⇩D (F a, F b, F c)"
begin
notation C.tensor (infixr "⊗⇩C" 53)
and C.unity ("ℐ⇩C")
and C.lunit ("𝗅⇩C[_]")
and C.runit ("𝗋⇩C[_]")
and C.assoc ("𝖺⇩C[_, _, _]")
and D.tensor (infixr "⊗⇩D" 53)
and D.unity ("ℐ⇩D")
and D.lunit ("𝗅⇩D[_]")
and D.runit ("𝗋⇩D[_]")
and D.assoc ("𝖺⇩D[_, _, _]")
lemma strictly_preserves_tensor:
assumes "C.arr f" and "C.arr g"
shows "F (f ⊗⇩C g) = F f ⊗⇩D F g"
using assms strictly_preserves_T by blast
lemma strictly_preserves_α:
assumes "C.arr f" and "C.arr g" and "C.arr h"
shows "F (α⇩C (f, g, h)) = α⇩D (F f, F g, F h)"
proof -
have "F (α⇩C (f, g, h)) = F ((f ⊗⇩C g ⊗⇩C h) ⋅⇩C α⇩C (C.dom f, C.dom g, C.dom h))"
using assms C.α.is_natural_1 [of "(f, g, h)"] C.T.ToCT_simp by force
also have "... = (F f ⊗⇩D F g ⊗⇩D F h) ⋅⇩D α⇩D (D.dom (F f), D.dom (F g), D.dom (F h))"
using assms strictly_preserves_α_ide strictly_preserves_tensor by simp
also have "... = α⇩D (F f, F g, F h)"
using assms D.α.is_natural_1 [of "(F f, F g, F h)"] by simp
finally show ?thesis by blast
qed
lemma strictly_preserves_unity:
shows "F ℐ⇩C = ℐ⇩D"
using C.unit_in_hom strictly_preserves_ι by auto
lemma strictly_preserves_assoc:
assumes "C.arr a" and "C.arr b" and "C.arr c"
shows "F 𝖺⇩C[a, b, c] = 𝖺⇩D[F a, F b, F c] "
using assms strictly_preserves_α by simp
lemma strictly_preserves_lunit:
assumes "C.ide a"
shows "F 𝗅⇩C[a] = 𝗅⇩D[F a]"
proof -
let ?P = "λf. f ∈ C.hom (ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C a) a ∧ ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C f = (ι⇩C ⊗⇩C a) ⋅⇩C C.assoc' ℐ⇩C ℐ⇩C a"
let ?Q = "λf. f ∈ D.hom (ℐ⇩D ⊗⇩D F a) (F a) ∧
ℐ⇩D ⊗⇩D f = (ι⇩D ⊗⇩D F a) ⋅⇩D D.assoc' ℐ⇩D ℐ⇩D (F a)"
have 1: "?P 𝗅⇩C[a]" using assms C.lunit_char by simp
hence "?Q (F 𝗅⇩C[a])"
proof -
have "F 𝗅⇩C[a] ∈ D.hom (ℐ⇩D ⊗⇩D F a) (F a)"
using assms 1 strictly_preserves_unity strictly_preserves_tensor by auto
moreover have
"F ((ι⇩C ⊗⇩C a) ⋅⇩C C.assoc' ℐ⇩C ℐ⇩C a) = (ι⇩D ⊗⇩D F a) ⋅⇩D D.assoc' ℐ⇩D ℐ⇩D (F a)"
using assms 1 strictly_preserves_ι strictly_preserves_assoc strictly_preserves_unity
strictly_preserves_tensor preserves_inv C.unit_in_hom
by auto
moreover have "ℐ⇩D ⊗⇩D F 𝗅⇩C[a] = F (ℐ⇩C ⊗⇩C 𝗅⇩C[a])"
using assms strictly_preserves_unity strictly_preserves_tensor by simp
ultimately show ?thesis
using assms C.lunit_char(2) by simp
qed
thus ?thesis using assms D.lunit_eqI by simp
qed
lemma strictly_preserves_runit:
assumes "C.ide a"
shows "F 𝗋⇩C[a] = 𝗋⇩D[F a]"
proof -
let ?P = "λf. f ∈ C.hom (a ⊗⇩C ℐ⇩C) a ∧ f ⊗⇩C ℐ⇩C = (a ⊗⇩C ι⇩C) ⋅⇩C C.assoc a ℐ⇩C ℐ⇩C"
let ?Q = "λf. f ∈ D.hom (F a ⊗⇩D ℐ⇩D) (F a) ∧
f ⊗⇩D ℐ⇩D = (F a ⊗⇩D ι⇩D) ⋅⇩D D.assoc (F a) ℐ⇩D ℐ⇩D"
have 1: "?P 𝗋⇩C[a]" using assms C.runit_char by simp
hence "?Q (F 𝗋⇩C[a])"
proof -
have "F 𝗋⇩C[a] ∈ D.hom (F a ⊗⇩D ℐ⇩D) (F a)"
using assms 1 strictly_preserves_unity strictly_preserves_tensor by auto
moreover have "F ((a ⊗⇩C ι⇩C) ⋅⇩C C.assoc a ℐ⇩C ℐ⇩C)
= (F a ⊗⇩D ι⇩D) ⋅⇩D D.assoc (F a) ℐ⇩D ℐ⇩D"
using assms 1 strictly_preserves_ι strictly_preserves_assoc strictly_preserves_unity
strictly_preserves_tensor preserves_inv C.unit_in_hom
by auto
moreover have "F 𝗋⇩C[a] ⊗⇩D ℐ⇩D = F (𝗋⇩C[a] ⊗⇩C ℐ⇩C)"
using assms strictly_preserves_unity strictly_preserves_tensor by simp
ultimately show ?thesis
using assms C.runit_char(2) by simp
qed
thus ?thesis using assms D.runit_eqI by simp
qed
text ‹
The following are used to simplify the expression of the sublocale relationship between
@{locale strict_monoidal_functor} and @{locale monoidal_functor}, as the definition of
the latter mentions the structure map @{term φ}. For a strict monoidal functor,
this is an identity transformation.
›
interpretation FF: product_functor C C D D F F ..
interpretation FoT⇩C: composite_functor C.CC.comp C D T⇩C F ..
interpretation T⇩DoFF: composite_functor C.CC.comp D.CC.comp D FF.map T⇩D ..
lemma structure_is_trivial:
shows "T⇩DoFF.map = FoT⇩C.map"
proof
fix x
have "C.CC.arr x ⟹ T⇩DoFF.map x = FoT⇩C.map x"
proof -
assume x: "C.CC.arr x"
have "T⇩DoFF.map x = F (fst x) ⊗⇩D F (snd x)"
using x by simp
also have "... = FoT⇩C.map x"
using x strictly_preserves_tensor [of "fst x" "snd x"] by simp
finally show "T⇩DoFF.map x = FoT⇩C.map x" by simp
qed
moreover have "¬ C.CC.arr x ⟹ T⇩DoFF.map x = FoT⇩C.map x"
using T⇩DoFF.is_extensional FoT⇩C.is_extensional by simp
ultimately show "T⇩DoFF.map x = FoT⇩C.map x" by blast
qed
abbreviation φ where "φ ≡ T⇩DoFF.map"
lemma structure_is_natural_isomorphism:
shows "natural_isomorphism C.CC.comp D T⇩DoFF.map FoT⇩C.map φ"
using T⇩DoFF.as_nat_iso.natural_isomorphism_axioms structure_is_trivial by force
end
text ‹
A strict monoidal functor is a monoidal functor.
›
sublocale strict_monoidal_functor ⊆ monoidal_functor C T⇩C α⇩C ι⇩C D T⇩D α⇩D ι⇩D F φ
proof -
interpret FF: product_functor C C D D F F ..
interpret FoT⇩C: composite_functor C.CC.comp C D T⇩C F ..
interpret T⇩DoFF: composite_functor C.CC.comp D.CC.comp D FF.map T⇩D ..
interpret φ: natural_isomorphism C.CC.comp D T⇩DoFF.map FoT⇩C.map φ
using structure_is_natural_isomorphism by simp
show "monoidal_functor C T⇩C α⇩C ι⇩C D T⇩D α⇩D ι⇩D F φ"
proof
show "D.isomorphic ℐ⇩D (F ℐ⇩C)"
proof (unfold D.isomorphic_def)
have "«ℐ⇩D : ℐ⇩D →⇩D F ℐ⇩C» ∧ D.iso ℐ⇩D"
using strictly_preserves_unity by auto
thus "∃f. «f : ℐ⇩D →⇩D F ℐ⇩C» ∧ D.iso f" by blast
qed
fix a b c
assume a: "C.ide a"
assume b: "C.ide b"
assume c: "C.ide c"
show "F 𝖺⇩C[a, b, c] ⋅⇩D φ (a ⊗⇩C b, c) ⋅⇩D (φ (a, b) ⊗⇩D F c) =
φ (a, b ⊗⇩C c) ⋅⇩D (F a ⊗⇩D φ (b, c)) ⋅⇩D 𝖺⇩D[F a, F b, F c]"
using a b c strictly_preserves_tensor strictly_preserves_assoc
D.comp_arr_dom D.comp_cod_arr
by simp
qed
qed
lemma strict_monoidal_functors_compose:
assumes "strict_monoidal_functor B T⇩B α⇩B ι⇩B C T⇩C α⇩C ι⇩C F"
and "strict_monoidal_functor C T⇩C α⇩C ι⇩C D T⇩D α⇩D ι⇩D G"
shows "strict_monoidal_functor B T⇩B α⇩B ι⇩B D T⇩D α⇩D ι⇩D (G o F)"
proof -
interpret F: strict_monoidal_functor B T⇩B α⇩B ι⇩B C T⇩C α⇩C ι⇩C F
using assms(1) by auto
interpret G: strict_monoidal_functor C T⇩C α⇩C ι⇩C D T⇩D α⇩D ι⇩D G
using assms(2) by auto
interpret GoF: composite_functor B C D F G ..
show ?thesis
using F.strictly_preserves_T F.strictly_preserves_ι F.strictly_preserves_α
G.strictly_preserves_T G.strictly_preserves_ι G.strictly_preserves_α
by (unfold_locales, simp_all)
qed
text ‹
An equivalence of monoidal categories is a monoidal functor whose underlying
ordinary functor is also part of an ordinary equivalence of categories.
›
locale equivalence_of_monoidal_categories =
C: monoidal_category C T⇩C α⇩C ι⇩C +
D: monoidal_category D T⇩D α⇩D ι⇩D +
equivalence_of_categories C D F G η ε +
monoidal_functor D T⇩D α⇩D ι⇩D C T⇩C α⇩C ι⇩C F φ
for C :: "'c comp" (infixr "⋅⇩C" 55)
and T⇩C :: "'c * 'c ⇒ 'c"
and α⇩C :: "'c * 'c * 'c ⇒ 'c"
and ι⇩C :: "'c"
and D :: "'d comp" (infixr "⋅⇩D" 55)
and T⇩D :: "'d * 'd ⇒ 'd"
and α⇩D :: "'d * 'd * 'd ⇒ 'd"
and ι⇩D :: "'d"
and F :: "'d ⇒ 'c"
and φ :: "'d * 'd ⇒ 'c"
and ι :: 'c
and G :: "'c ⇒ 'd"
and η :: "'d ⇒ 'd"
and ε :: "'c ⇒ 'c"
end