Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006, pp.47–78 PSEUDO-CATEGORIES N. MARTINS-FERREIRA (communicated by Ross Street) Abstract We provide a complete description of the category of pseudocategories (including pseudo-functors, natural and pseudonatural transformations and pseudo modifications). A pseudocategory is a non strict version of an internal category. It was called a weak category and weak double category in some earlier papers. When internal to Cat it is at the same time a generalization of a bicategory and a double category. The category of pseudo-categories is a kind of “tetracategory” and it turns out to be cartesian closed in a suitable sense. 1. Introduction The notion of pseudo-category1 considered in this paper is closely related and essentially is a special case of several higher categorical structures studied for example by Grandis and Paré [8], Leinster [3], Street [11],[12], among several others. We have arrived to the present definition of pseudo-category (which some authors would probably call a pseudo double category) while describing internal bicategories in Ab [5]. We even found it easier, for our particular purposes, to work with pseudo-categories than to work with bicategories. Defining a pseudo-category we begin with a 2-category, take the definition of an internal category there, and replace the equalities in the associativity and identity axioms by the existence of suitable isomorphisms which then have to satisfy some coherence conditions. That is, let C be a 2-category, a pseudo-category in (internal to) C is a system (C0 , C1 , d, c, e, m, α, λ, ρ) where C0 , C1 are objects of C, d, c : C1 −→ C0 , e : C0 −→ C1 , m : C1 ×C0 C1 −→ C1 The author thanks to Professor G. Janelidze for reading and suggesting useful changes to clarify the subject, and also to Professors R. Brown and T. Porter for the enlightning discutions during the seminars presented at Bangor. Received April 14, 2005, revised April 11, 2006; published on May 5, 2006. 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification: Primary 18D05, 18D15; Secondary 57D99. Key words and phrases: Bicategory, double category, weak category, pseudo-category, pseudo double category, pseudo-functor, pseudo-natural transformation, pseudo-modification, weakly cartesian closed. c 2006, N. Martins-Ferreira. Permission to copy for private use granted. 1 In the previous work [6] the word ”weak” was used with the same meaning. We claim that ”pseudo” is more apropriate because it is the intermediate term between precategory and internal category. Also it agrees with the notion of pseudo-functor, already well established. Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 48 are morphisms of C , with C1 ×C0 C1 the object in the pullback diagram π C1 ×C0 C1 −−−2−→ π1 y C1 c y ; d −−−−→ C0 C1 α : m (1C1 ×C0 m) −→ m (m ×C0 1C1 ) , λ : m hec, 1C1 i −→ 1C1 , ρ : m h1C1 , edi −→ 1C1 , are 2-cells of C (which are isomorphisms), the following conditions are satisfied de = 1c0 = ce, (1.1) dm = dπ2 , cm = cπ1 , (1.2) d ◦ λ = 1d = d ◦ ρ, c ◦ λ = 1c = c ◦ ρ, (1.3) d ◦ α = 1dπ3 , c ◦ α = 1cπ1 , (1.4) λ ◦ e = ρ ◦ e, (1.5) and the following diagrams commute m◦(1C1 ×C0 α) /• 00 00 00 α◦(1C1 ×C0 1C1 ×C0 m) 00α◦(1C1 ×C0 m×C0 1C1 ) 00 00 0 •B • BB || | BB || BB || BB | | B α◦(m×C0 1C1 ×C0 1C1 ) BB || m◦(α×C0 1C1 ) | BB BB ||| ~| • • α◦(1C1 ×C0 <ec,1C1 >) /• •? ?? ?? ?? ?? m◦(ρ×C0 1C1 ) m◦(1C1 ×C0 λ) ?? ?? ? • (1.6) (1.7) Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 49 Examples: 1. When C=Set with the discrete 2-category structure (only identity 2-cells) one obtains the definition of an ordinary category since α, λ, ρ are all identities; 2. When C=Set with the codiscrete 2-category structure (exactly one 2-cell for each pair of morphisms) one obtain the definition of a precategory since α, λ, ρ always exist and the coherence conditions are trivially satisfied; (This result applies equally to any category) 3. When C=Grp considered as a 2-category: every group is a (one object) category and the inclusion functor Grp −→ Cat induces a 2-category structure in Grp, where a 2-cell τ : f −→ g , (f, g : A −→ B group homomorphisms) is an element τ ∈ B, such that for every x ∈ A, g (x) = τ f (x) τ −1 . With this setting, a pseudo-category in Grp is described (see [7]) by a group homomorphism ∂ : X −→ B, an arbitrary element δ ∈ ker ∂ and an action of B in X (denoted by b · x for b ∈ B and x ∈ X) satisfying ∂ (b · x) = b∂ (x) b−1 ∂ (x) · x0 = x + x0 − x for every b ∈ B, x, x0 ∈ X. Note that the difference to a crossed module (description of an internal category in Grp) is that in a crossed module the element δ = 1. The pseudo-category so obtained is as follows: objects are the elements of B, arrows are pairs (x, b) : b −→ ∂x + b and the composition of (x0 , ∂x + b) : ∂x+b −→ ∂x0 +∂x+b with (x, b) : b −→ ∂x+b is the pair (x0 + x − δ + b · δ, b) : b −→ ∂x0 + ∂x + b. The isomorphism between (0, ∂x + b) ◦ (x, b) = (x, b) ◦ (0, b) and (x, b) is the element (δ, 0) ∈ X o B . Associativity is satisfied, since (x00 , ∂x0 + ∂x + b) ◦ ((x0 , ∂x + b) ◦ (x, b)) = ((x00 , ∂x0 + ∂x + b) ◦ (x0 , ∂x + b)) ◦ (x, b) . 4. When C=Mor(Ab) the 2-category of morphisms of abelian groups, the above definition gives a structure which is completely determined by a commutative Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 50 square ∂ A1 −−−−→ k1 y A0 k y 0 ∂0 B1 −−−−→ B0 together with three morphisms λ, ρ : A0 −→ A1 , η : B0 −→ A1 , satisfying conditions k1 λ = 0 = k1 ρ, k1 η = 0, and it may be viewed as a structure with objects, vertical arrows, horizontal arrows and squares, in the following way (see [6], p. 409, for more details) (b,x) − −−−−−−−−−−− → b b d y b + ∂ 0 (d) b d x y b + k0 (x) b+k0 (x) y d+k1 (y) , ∗ −−−−−−−−−−−−−→ (b+∂ 0 (d),x+∂(y)) where ∗ stands for b + ∂ 0 (d) + k0 (x + ∂ (y)) = b + k0 (x) + ∂ 0 (d + k1 (y)) . 5. When C=Top (with homotopy classes as 2-cells) we find the following particular example. Let X be a space and consider the following diagram d −−→ e X ×X X −→ X ←− −−→X I I m I c I where X is equipped with the compact open topology and X I ×X X I with the product topology (I is the unit interval), with X I ×X X I = {hg, f i | f (0) = g (1)} and d, e, c, m defined as follows d (f ) = f (0) c (f ) = f (1) ex (t) = x g (2t) , t < 21 m (f, g) = f (2t − 1) , t > 1 2 with f, g : I −→ X (continuous maps) and x ∈ X. The homotopies α, λ, ρ are the usual ones. Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 51 6. When C=Cat the objects C0 and C1 are (small) categories, and the morphisms d, c, e, m are functors. We denote the objects of C0 by the first capital letters in the alphabet (possible with primes) A, A0 , B, B 0 , ... and the morphisms by first small letters in the alphabet a : A −→ A0 , b : B −→ B 0 , ... . We will denote the objects of C1 by small letters as f, f 0 , g, g 0 , ... and the morphisms by small greek letters as ϕ : f −→ f 0 , γ : g −→ g 0 , ... . We will also consider that the functors d and c are defined as follows C1 C0 a : A −→ A0 d% ϕ : f −→ f 0 c& b : B −→ B 0 hence, the objects of C1 are arrows f : A −→ B, f 0 : A0 −→ B 0 , that we will always represent using inplace notation as A f / B , A0 f 0 / B 0 to distinguish from the morphisms of C0 , and thus the morphisms of C1 are of the form A A0 /B b . / B0 f a ϕ f0 The functor e sends a : A −→ A0 to A A0 /A idA a id ida A0 a , / A0 while the functor m sends hγ, ϕi to γ ⊗ ϕ as displayed in the diagram below A a A0 f ϕ f0 /B b / B0 /C g γ c / C0 g0 A 7 → a − A0 Each component of α is of the form A 1A A h⊗(g⊗f ) αh,g,f (h⊗g)⊗f /D 1D , /D g⊗f γ⊗ϕ g 0 ⊗f 0 /C c . / C0 Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 52 while the components of λ and ρ are given by A 1A A /B 1B /B idB ⊗f λf f A 1A A , /B 1B . /B f ⊗idA ρf f Thus, a description of pseudo-category in Cat is as follows. - A pseudo-category in Cat is a structure with objects: A, A0 , A00 , B, B 0 , ... morphisms: a : A −→ A0 , a0 : A0 −→ A00 , b : B −→ B 0 , ... pseudo-morphisms: A f / B , A0 f 0 / B 0 , B g / C , ... and cells: A a A0 f ϕ 0 f /B b / B0 , A0 0 a A00 f0 f ϕ0 00 / B0 0 b / B 00 , B B0 b /C g 0 g γ c , ... / C0 where objects and morphisms form a category a00 (a0 a) = (a00 a0 ) a, 1A0 a = a1A ; pseudo-morphisms and cells also form a category ϕ00 (ϕ0 ϕ) = (ϕ00 ϕ0 ) ϕ, 1f 0 ϕ = ϕ1f , with 1f being the cell A A 1A f 1f f /B 1B ; /B for each pair of pseudo-composable cells γ, ϕ, there is a pseudo-composition γ ⊗ ϕ A a A0 g⊗f γ⊗ϕ g 0 ⊗f 0 /C c ; / C0 satisfying (γ 0 γ) ⊗ (ϕ0 ϕ) = (γ 0 ⊗ ϕ0 ) (γ ⊗ ϕ) , 1g⊗f = 1g ⊗ 1f ; (1.8) Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 53 for each morphism a : A −→ A0 , there is a pseudo-identity ida A A0 /A a / A0 idA a ida idA0 satisfying id1A = 1idA ida0 a = ida0 ida ; there is a special cell αh,g,f for each triple of composable pseudo-morphisms h, g, f A 1A A h⊗(g⊗f ) αh,g,f (h⊗g)⊗f /D 1D , /D natural in each component, i.e., the following diagram of cells h ⊗ (g ⊗ f ) η⊗(γ⊗ϕ)y αh,g,f −−−−→ (h ⊗ g) ⊗ f (η⊗γ)⊗ϕ y αh0 ,g0 ,f 0 h0 ⊗ (g 0 ⊗ f 0 ) −−−−−→ (h0 ⊗ g 0 ) ⊗ f 0 commutes for every triple of pseudo-composable cells ϕ, γ, η A a A0 /B b / B0 f ϕ f0 g g0 γ /C c / C0 /D h η h0 d ; / D0 to each pseudo-morphism f : A −→ B there are two special cells A A /B 1B /B idB ⊗f 1A λf f , A A 1A f ⊗idA ρf f /B 1B , /B natural in f , that is, to every cell ϕ as above, the following diagrams of cells commute λf idB ⊗ f −−−−→ id1B ⊗ϕy id B0 0 λf 0 f ϕ y ⊗ f −−−−→ f 0 ρf , f ⊗ idA −−−−→ ϕ⊗id1A y λf 0 f ϕ y f 0 ⊗ idB 0 −−−−→ f 0 . Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 54 And furthermore, the following conditions are satisfied whenever the compositions are defined f ⊗ (g ⊗ (h ⊗ k)) f ⊗αg,h,k vv αf,g,h⊗k vv v v v vv zvv (f ⊗ g) ⊗ (h ⊗ k) / f ⊗ ((g ⊗ h) ⊗ k) HH HH α HHf,g⊗h,k HH HH H$ (f ⊗ (g ⊗ h)) ⊗ k TTTT TTTT TTT αf ⊗g,h,k TTTT TTT ) jj jjjj j j j j jjjjαf,g,h ⊗k ju jjj ((f ⊗ g) ⊗ h) ⊗ k f ⊗ (1 ⊗ g) αf,1,g HH HH HH HH HH f ⊗λg HHH HH HH $ / (f ⊗ 1) ⊗ g v . vv vv v v v vv vv ρf ⊗g v vv vz v f ⊗g Examples of pseudo-categories internal to Cat include the usual bicategories of Spans, Bimodules, homotopies, ... where in each case it is also allowed to consider the natural morphisms between the objects in order to obtain a vertical categorical structure. For example in the case of spans we would have sets as objects, maps as morphisms, spans A ←− S −→ B as pseudo-morphisms and the cells being triples (h, k, l) with the following two squares commutative A ←−−−− S −−−−→ hy ky B yl . A0 ←−−−− S 0 −−−−→ B A pseudo-category in Cat has the following structures: a category (with objects and morphisms); a category (with pseudo-morphisms and cells); a bicategory (considering only the morphisms that are identities); a double category (if all the special cells are identity cells). Other examples as Cat (with modules as pseudo-morphisms) may be found in [3] or [8]. The present description of pseudo double category (internal pseudo-category in Cat) is the same given by Leinster [3] and differs from the one considered by Grandis and Paré [8] in the sense that they also have idA = idA ⊗ idA . In the following sections we will provide a complete description of pseudo-functors, natural and pseudo-natural transformations and pseudo-modifications. We prove that all the compositions are well defined (except for the horizontal composition Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 55 of pseudo-natural transformations which is only defined up to an isomorphism). In the end we show that the category of pseudo-categories (internal to some ambient 2-category C) is Cartesian closed up to isomorphism. We will give all the definitions in terms of the internal structure to some ambient 2-category and also explain what is obtained in the case where the ambient 2-category is Cat. While doing some proofs we will make use of Yoneda embedding and consider the diagrams in Cat rather than in the abstract ambient 2-category. We will also freely use known definitions and results from [4],[1],[2] and [10]. 2. Pseudo-Functors Let C be a 2-category and suppose C = (C0 , C1 , d, c, e, m, α, λ, ρ) , C 0 = (C00 , C10 , d0 , c0 , e0 , m0 , α0 , λ0 , ρ0 ) (2.1) are two pseudo-categories in C. A pseudo-functor F : C −→ C 0 is a system F = (F0 , F1 , µ, ε) where F0 : C0 −→ C00 , F1 : C1 −→ C10 are morphisms of C, µ : F1 m −→ m0 (F1 ×F0 F1 ) , ε : F1 e −→ e0 F0 , are 2-cells of C (that are isomorphisms2 ), the following conditions are satisfied d0 F1 = F0 d, c0 F1 = F0 c, (2.2) d0 ◦ µ = 1F0 dπ2 , c0 ◦ µ = 1F0 cπ1 , (2.3) d0 ◦ ε = 1F0 , c0 ◦ ε = 1F0 , (2.4) and the following diagrams commute µ(1×C0 m) •@ @@ @@ @@ µ(m×C0 1) F1 α 2 Some /• @@ 0 @@m (1F1 ×µ) , @@ @ • 0 α (F1 ×F0 F1 ×F0 F1 ) /• • m0 (µ×1F1 ) • (2.5) authors (example Grandis and Paré in [8, 9]) consider the notion of pseudo - which corresponds to the present one - but also consider the notions of lax and colax where the 2-cells may not be isomorphisms. Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 F1 ρ • µh1,ediy −−−−→ • x 0 ρ F1 , m0 (1F1 ×ε) 56 (2.6) • −−−−−−−→ • F λ −−−1−→ • µhec,1iy • x 0 λ F1 . m0 (ε×1F1 ) • −−−−−−−→ • Consider the particular case of C=Cat. Let A A0 f a ϕ f0 /B b / B0 be a cell in the pseudo-category C. A pseudo-functor F : C −→ C 0 , consists of four maps (sending objects to objects, morphisms to morphisms, pseudo-morphisms to pseudo-morphisms and cells to cells - that we will denote only by F to keep notation simple) FA Fa F A0 Ff Fϕ F f0 / FB ; Fb / F B0 a special cell µf,g FA 1 FA F (g⊗f ) µf,g F g⊗F f / FC 1 / FC to each pair of composable pseudo-morphisms f, g; a special cell εA FA 1 FA F (idA ) A idF A / FA 1 / FA Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 57 to each object A, and satisfying the commutativity of the following diagrams F (αf,g,h ) F (f ⊗ (g ⊗ h)) / F ((f ⊗ g) ⊗ h) , µf ⊗g,h µf,g⊗h F (f ⊗ g) ⊗ F (h) F (f ) ⊗ F (g ⊗ h) µf,g ⊗F (h) F (f )⊗µg,h F (f ) ⊗ (F (g) ⊗ F (h)) 0 / (F (f ) ⊗ F (g)) ⊗ F (h) αF f,F g,F h F (f ⊗ idA ) µf,idA y F (ρf ) −−−−→ F (f ) x ρ0 Ff , F (f )⊗εA F (f ) ⊗ F (idA ) −−−−−−→ F (f ) ⊗ idF (A) F (idB ⊗ f ) µidB ,f y F (λf ) −−−−→ F (f ) x λ0 Ff , εB ⊗F (f ) F (idB ) ⊗ F (f ) −−−−−−→ idF (B) ⊗ F (f ) whenever the pseudo-compositions are defined. Return to the general case. Let F : C −→ C 0 and G : C 0 −→ C 00 be pseudo-functors in a 2-category C. Consider C and C 0 as in (2.1) and let C 00 = (C000 , C100 , d00 , c00 , e00 , m00 , α00 , λ00 , ρ00 ) , F = F0 , F1 , µF , εF , G = G0 , G1 , µG , εG . The composition of the pseudo-functors F and G is defined by the formula GF = G0 F0 , G1 F1 , µG ◦ (F1 ×F0 F1 ) · G1 ◦ µF , εG ◦ F0 · G1 ◦ εF (2.7) where ◦ represents the horizontal composition in C and · represents the vertical Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 58 composition, as displayed in the diagram below m e m0 e0 m00 e00 C1 ×C0 C1 −−−−→ C1 ←−−−− C0 F1 ×F0 F1 y εF ⇓ yF0 µF ⇓ F1 y C10 ×C00 C10 −−−−→ C10 ←−−−− C00 . G1 ×G0 G1 y εG ⇓ yG0 µG ⇓ G1 y C100 ×C000 C100 −−−−→ C100 ←−−−− C000 Proposition 1. The above formula to compose pseudo-functors is well defined. Proof. Consider the system GF = G0 F0 , G1 F1 , µGF , εGF with µGF , εGF as in (2.7). We will show that GF is a pseudo-functor from the pseudo-category C to the pseudo-category C 00 . It is clear that G0 F0 : C0 −→ C000 , G1 F1 : C1 −→ C100 , are morphisms of the ambient 2-category C and µGF : G1 F1 m −→ m00 (G1 F1 ×G0 F0 G1 F1 ) , εGF : G1 F1 e −→ e00 G0 F0 are 2-cells of C and they are isomorphisms. Conditions (2.2) are satisfied and d00 µGF = d µG ◦ (F1 ×F0 F1 ) · G1 ◦ µF = d ◦ µG ◦ (F1 ×F0 F1 ) · d ◦ G1 ◦ µF = 1G0 d0 π20 ◦ (F1 ×F0 F1 ) · G0 ◦ d0 ◦ µF = 1G0 d0 π0 (F1 ×F F1 ) · (G0 ◦ 1F0 dπ2 ) 2 0 = 1G0 d0 F1 π2 · 1G0 F0 dπ2 = 1G0 F0 dπ2 , as well c00 µGF = 1G0 F0 cπ1 , hence (2.3) holds. Also d00 εGF = d00 εG ◦ F0 · G1 ◦ εF = d00 ◦ εG ◦ F0 · d00 G1 ◦ εF = (1G0 ◦ F0 ) · G0 d0 ◦ εF = 1G0 F0 · (G0 ◦ 1F0 ) = 1G0 F0 · 1G0 F0 = 1G0 F0 , and similarly c00 εGF = 1G0 F0 , so conditions (2.4) are satisfied. Commutativity of diagrams (2.5) , (2.6) follows from Yoneda Lemma and the Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 59 commutativity of the following diagrams H(αf,g,h ) / H(f ⊗g)⊗h) == == == == µH µH f,g⊗h == f ⊗g,h G G F ⊗F F ⊗F = f ⊗g h f g⊗h I N N p I u NNN === II u pppp u N II u NNN === II uu ppppp u NN' = I u 0 wp $ G(αF f,F g,F h ) zu / (2) Hf ⊗ Hg⊗h H (1) f ⊗g ⊗ Hh II ==NNN p uu p I p u == NNN I p II uu == NNN ppp II uu NN' == I$ uu ppp w p z u == GFf ⊗Fg ⊗ Hh ==Ff ⊗ GFg ⊗Fh H µ ⊗H Hf ⊗µH == g,h f,g h == == α00 Hf,Hg,Hh / (Hf ⊗ Hg ) ⊗ Hh Hf ⊗ (Hg ⊗ Hh ) Hf ⊗(g⊗h) µH id B ,f HidB H(λf ) / Hf QQQ O QQQ ( / GidF ⊗Ff GFidB ⊗Ff B | | λ00 Hf | | | | G ⊗ H | idFB f || RRR ff3 RRR fffff || f f f | f R( ~| ffff / idHB ⊗ Hf ⊗ Hf H HidB ⊗f B ⊗Hf H(ρ ) f / Hf PPP O PPP ( / GFf ⊗idF GFf ⊗FidA A | | µH ρ00 f,idA Hf | || | H ⊗ G | f id FA || QQQ fff3 QQQ || fffff f f | f Q( f ~| fff / Ff ⊗ idHA Hf ⊗ HidA H Hf ⊗idA Hf ⊗A where (1) = GFf ⊗(Fg ⊗Fh ) and (2) = G(Ff ⊗Fg )⊗Fh . We also use the abbreviations H = GF and Ff or F f instead of F (f ) to save space in the diagram. Composition of pseudo-functors is associative and there is an identity pseudofunctor for every pseudo-category, namely the pseudo-functor 1C = (1C0 , 1C1 , 1m , 1e ) for the pseudo-category C = (C0 , C1 , d, c, e, m, α, λ, ρ) . Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 60 Given a 2-category C, we define the category PsCat(C) consisting of all pseudocategories and pseudo-functors internal to C. 3. Natural and pseudo-natural transformations Let C be a 2-category and suppose C = (C0 , C1 , d, c, e, m, α, λ, ρ) , C 0 = (C00 , C10 , d0 , c0 , e0 , m0 , α0 , λ0 , ρ0 ) (3.1) are pseudo-categories in C and F = F0 , F1 , µF , εF , G = G0 , G1 , µG , εG (3.2) are pseudo-functors from C to C 0 . A natural transformation θ : F −→ G is a pair θ = (θ0 , θ1 ) of 2-cells of C θ0 : F0 −→ G0 θ1 : F1 −→ G1 satisfying d0 ◦ θ1 = θ0 ◦ d c0 ◦ θ1 = θ0 ◦ c and the commutativity of the following diagrams of 2-cells • µF y θ ◦m −−1−−→ • G yµ m0 ◦(θ1 ×θ0 θ1 ) • −−−−−−−−−→ • θ ◦e 1 • −−− −→ εF y e0 ◦θ0 • G yε . • −−−−→ • A pseudo-natural transformation T : F −→ G is a pair T = (t, τ ) where t : C0 −→ C10 is a morphism of C, τ : m0 hG1 , tdi −→ m0 htc, F1 i Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 61 is a 2-cell (that is an isomorphism); the following conditions are satisfied d0 t = F0 c0 t = G0 (3.3) d0 ◦ τ = 1d0 F1 c0 ◦ τ = 1c0 G1 (3.4) and the following diagrams of 2-cells are commutative3 α−1 (G1 ×G0 G1 ×G0 t) m0 hµ−1 G ,tdπ2 i • • /• @@ 0 @@m hG1 π1 ,τ π2 i @@ @ • τm •@ @@ @@ @@ 0 m htcπ1 ,µF i • • /• (3.5) , α(G1 ×G0 t×F0 F1 ) 0 m hτ π1 ,F1 π2 i α(t×F0 F1 ×F0 F1 ) τe /• • @@ 0 @@m h1t ,εF i . λ0 t @@ @ • OOO o• OOO ooo o OOO o o O ooo 0 m0 hεG ,1t i OOO O' woooo ρ t • (3.6) In the case C=Cat: let W, W 0 be two pseudo-categories in Cat, and F, G : W −→ W two pseudo-functors. Given a cell 0 A A0 a f ϕ f0 /B b / B0 in W , we will write FA F A0 Fa 3G 1 Ff Fϕ F f0 / FB Fb / F B0 and GA GA0 Ga ×G0 t ×F0 F1 : C1 ×C0 C0 ×C0 C1 −→ C1 ×C0 C1 ×C0 C1 t ×F0 F1 ×F0 F1 : C0 ×C0 C1 ×C0 C1 −→ C1 ×C0 C1 ×C0 C1 G1 ×G0 G1 ×G0 t : C1 ×C0 C1 ×C0 C0 −→ C1 ×C0 C1 ×C0 C1 Gf Gϕ Gf 0 / GB Gb / GB 0 Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 62 for the image of ϕ under F and G. The description of natural and pseudo-natural transformations in this particular case is as follows: - While a natural transformation θ : F −→ G is a family of cells FA GA θA Ff θf Gf / FB θB , / GB one for each pseudo-morphism f in W , such that for every cell ϕ in W , the square θf F f −−−−→ F ϕy Gf Gϕ y θf 0 F f 0 −−−−→ Gf 0 is commutative as displayed in the picture below Fa / NN NNN FfN NN N N b NNN θ F N NNNN F ϕ 0 NNNNθNf NNBN / NNNN NNN NNN θA NNN F f NN N N N NNN NNN NNNθB0 NNNN NNNθf 0 N "* & &/ N NN NNN NNN Gf N θA0 NNN N N N Gϕ Ga NN& NN& "* / Gf 0 ; Gb and furthermore, given two composable pseudo-morphisms g, f and an object A in W , the following squares are commutative µF g,f F (g ⊗ f ) −−−−→ F g ⊗ F f θ ⊗θ θg⊗f y yg f µG g,f G (g ⊗ f ) −−−−→ Gg ⊗ Gf εF F (idA ) −−−A−→ idF A id θidA y y θA . G (idA ) −−−−→ idGA εG A - Rather a pseudo-natural transformation T : F −→ G consists of two families of Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 63 cells FA Fa F A0 tA ta tA0 / GA Ga / GA0 and FA 1 FA Gf ⊗tA τf tB ⊗F f / GB 1 / GB with a a morphism and f a pseudo-morphism of W , as displayed in the following picture Fa /4< N NNN Ff NNN ppp FNbNNNN Fϕ p p N p NNN tA NNN F f 0 pppppτf pp /4< NNNN tB NNN p NN ta NNN pp NN tb NNN p p & p /& tA0 N tB 0 N Gf ppτp0 p NNN NNN p f p Gϕ Ga NN& ppp NN& 0 / Gb Gf such that (t is a functor) ta0 a = ta ta0 t1A = 1tA (τ is natural) τf Gf ⊗ tA −−−−→ tB Gϕ⊗ta y ⊗ Ff t ⊗F ϕ yb τf 0 , Gf 0 ⊗ tA0 −−−−→ tB 0 ⊗ F f 0 and for every two composable pseudo-morphisms A f /B g / C , the following Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 64 diagrams of cells in W 0 are commutative / G (g) ⊗ (G (f ) ⊗ tA ) (G (g) ⊗ G (f )) ⊗ tA RRR nn RRR n n n RRR n nn RRR n n R) vnn G (g ⊗ f ) ⊗ tA G (g) ⊗ (tB ⊗ F (f )) (G (g) ⊗ tB ) ⊗ F (f ) tC ⊗ F (g ⊗ f ) PPP PPP PPP PPP ( ll lll l l lll lu ll / (tC ⊗ F (g)) ⊗ F (f ) tC ⊗ (F (g) ⊗ F (f )) G (idA ) ⊗ tA oo o o oo o o ow oo idGA ⊗ tA V VVVV VVVV VVVV VVVV VVVV VV+ / tA ⊗ F (idA ) OOO . OOO OOO OO' tA ⊗ idF A hhh h h h hh hhhh hhhh h h h hhh tA hs Return to the general case. Let C be a 2-category and suppose C, C 0 , C 00 are pseudo-categories in C and F, G, H : C −→ C 0 , F 0 , G0 : C 0 −→ C 00 are pseudo-functors. Natural transformations θ, θ0 , θ̇ F C G θ θ̇ H " / C0 < F0 * 00 0 θ 4 C G0 may be composed horizontally with θ0 ◦ θ = (θ00 , θ10 ) ◦ (θ0 , θ1 ) = (θ00 ◦ θ0 , θ10 ◦ θ1 ) obtained composition of 2-cells of C, and vertically with θ̇ · θ = from the horizontal θ̇0 , θ̇1 ·(θ0 , θ1 ) = θ̇0 · θ0 , θ̇1 · θ1 obtained from the vertical composition of 2-cells of C. Clearly both compositions are well defined, are associative, have identities and satisfy the middle interchange law. This fact may be stated as in the following theorem. Theorem 1. Let C be a 2-category. The category PsCat(C) (with pseudo-categories, pseudo-functors and natural transformations) is a 2-category. Composition of pseudo-natural transformations is much more delicate. Again let C be a 2-category and suppose C, C 0 are pseudo-categories in C, F, G, H : C −→ C 0 are pseudo-functors (as above) and consider the pseudo-natural transformations T S F −→ G −→ H Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 65 with T = (t, τ ) , S = (s, σ) . Vertical composition of pseudo-natural transformations S and T is defined as S ⊗ T = (m0 hs, ti , σ ⊗ τ ) (3.7) where σ ⊗ τ = α hsc, tc, F1 i · m0 h1sc , τ i · α−1 hsc, G1 , tdi · m0 hσ, 1td i · α hH1 , sd, tdi . (3.8) The above formula in the case C=Cat is expressed as follows (s ⊗ t)a = sa ⊗ ta , FA Fa F A0 tA ta tA0 / GA Ga / GA0 / HA Ha ; / HA0 sA sa sA 0 and (σ ⊗ τ )f = α (sB ⊗ τf ) α−1 (σf ⊗ tA ) α, as displayed in the following picture (στ )f Hf ⊗ (sA ⊗ tA ) −−−−→ (sB ⊗ tB ) ⊗ F f x α αy (Hf ⊗ sA ) ⊗ tA σf ⊗tA y sB ⊗ (tB ⊗ F f ) x s ⊗τ B f . (sB ⊗ Gf ) ⊗ tA −−−−→ sB ⊗ (Gf ⊗ tA ) α−1 Return to the general case. Theorem 2. The vertical composition of pseudo-natural transformations is well defined. Proof. Consider C, C 0 as in (3.1), F, G as in (3.2) , H = (H0 , H1 , µH , εH ) and S, T as above. Clearly (st) = m0 hs, ti : C0 −→ C10 is a morphism of C and στ : m0 hH1 , (st) di −→ m0 h(st) c, F1 i is a 2-cell of C that is an isomorphism (is defined as a composition of isomorphisms). Conditions (3.3) and (3.4) are satisfied d0 m0 hs, ti = d0 π20 hs, ti = d0 t = F0 , Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 66 also c0 m0 hs, ti = c0 s = H0 , and d0 ◦ (σ ⊗ τ ) = d0 ◦ α hsc, tc, F1 i · m0 h1sc , τ i · α−1 hsc, G1 , tdi · m0 hσ, 1td i · α hH1 , sd, tdi = d0 ◦ α hsc, tc, F1 i · d0 ◦ m0 h1sc , τ i · d0 ◦ α−1 hsc, G1 , tdi · d0 ◦ m0 hσ, 1td i · d0 ◦ α hH1 , sd, tdi = 1d0 F1 · 1d0 F 1 · 1d0 td · 1d0 td · 1d0 td = 1d0 F1 · 1d0 td = 1d0 F1 · 1F0 d = 1d0 F1 · 1d0 F1 = 1d0 F1 with similar computations for c0 ◦ (σ ⊗ τ ) = 1c0 H1 . Commutativity of diagrams (3.5) and (3.6) is obtained using Yoneda Lemma, writing the respective diagrams and adding all the possible arrows to fill them in order to obtain the following mask and diamond /? ? (mask) ? ??? ??? / ? / / ? ?? ?? ?? ? ?? ? ? / ?? ?? ?? ?? ? ? ? ? / ? / ?? ??? ? ? / o _?? ?? ?? ?? ? ?? ? ? ? ? ? ? O ? ? OOO ?? ?? oo o OOO o ? ? oo OOO ooo OOO o o OO' oo / woo / /// G 444 44 // 44 O 7 44 / O o O o / OO' oo O / o / / DDOOO // / ooozoz7 DDO' // o z DD ?? / zzzz DD ? ? / zz DD ? 4 DD?? 44 zzzz DD?? 4 z DD??44 DD??44 zzz DD?4 zz " |z (diamond) in which squares commute by naturality, hexagons commute by definition of (σ ⊗ τ ), octagons commute because S, T are pseudo-natural transformations, pentagons in the diamond commute by the same reason and all the other pentagons and triangles commute by coherence. The horizontal composition of pseudo-natural transformations is only defined up to an isomorphism and it will be considered at the end of this paper. In the next section we define square pseudo-modification ( simply called pseudomodification) and show that given two pseudo-categories C, C 0 , we obtain a pseudocategory by considering the pseudo-functors as objects, natural transformations Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 67 as morphisms, pseudo-natural transformations as pseudo-morphisms and pseudomodifications as cells. So, in particular, we will show that the vertical composition of pseudo-natural transformations is associative and has identities up to isomorphism. We also show that PsCat is Cartesian closed up to isomorphism, that is, instead of an isomorphism of categories PsCat(A × B, C)∼ =PsCat(A,PsCAT(B, C)) we get an equivalence of categories PsCat(A × B, C)∼PsCat(A,PsCAT(B, C)). 4. Pseudo-modifications Let C be a 2-category. Suppose C, C 0 are pseudo-categories in C, F, G, H, K : C −→ C 0 are pseudo-functors, T = (t, τ ) : F −→ G, T 0 = (t0 , τ 0 ) : H −→ K are pseudo-natural transformations and θ = (θ0 , θ1 ) : F −→ H, θ0 = (θ00 , θ10 ) : G −→ K are two natural transformations. A pseudo-modification Φ (that will be represented as) F H T Φ θ T0 /G 0 θ /K is a 2-cell of C Φ : t −→ t0 satisfying d0 ◦ Φ = θ0 c0 ◦ Φ = θ00 (4.1) and the commutativity of the square τ • −−−−→ m0 hθ10 ,Φ◦diy • 0 ym hΦ◦c,θ1 i . τ0 • −−−−→ • (4.2) Consider the case where C=Cat. Suppose W, W 0 are two pseudo-categories in Cat, F, G, H, K : W −→ W 0 are pseudo-functors, T : F −→ G, T 0 : H −→ K are pseudo-natural transformations and θ : F −→ G, θ0 : H −→ K are natural transformations. A pseudo-modification Φ F θ H T Φ T0 /G 0 θ /K Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 68 is a family of cells FA θA HA / GA tA 0 θA / KA ΦA t0A of W 0 , for each object A in W , where the square Φ tA −−−A−→ ta y Φ t0A t0 ya , (4.3) 0 tA0 −−−A−→ t0A0 commutes for every morphism a : A −→ A0 in W (naturality of Φ) and the square τf Gf ⊗ tA −−−−→ tB θf0 ⊗ΦA y ⊗ Ff Φ ⊗θ y B f , (4.4) Kf ⊗ t0A −−−0−→ t0B ⊗ Hf τf commutes for every pseudo-morphism f : A −→ B in W . Both squares (4.3) and (4.4) may be displayed together with full information, for a ϕ in W , as follows / Ff s D szzs8@ DDDD ssss z ss DDD s s z s s s s z DD DD s ss sszzz ss DDssssssss F ϕ DD sszzzzzz ss s s s s s z 0 s / z s s s z t F f s D D @ 8 D A z s s s stBD s s s s ss sssDssDssDssDssssss DDsDssssss sssszzzzzzz τf szzszzszz DDDssDsssss DDD θA sss s s s s s s D s z ss ss D tass s z ss D tb DDD s zz s ss ss ssssssssssssθssfs DsDssssss ssDDsDs" θzBzzzzz ssszzzzzz sssssss DD ss D" s s s s z s s z ss s tB 0D ss sssssssssssssss ssssssssstAs0DsDsDs ss sssszzzzzzτfs0 sssssssssssGf s/ ss s s D s s s s s s s s D s s z s s s s θ A0 s ss sss ssssssssss sssssssssssss sDsD sss zzzz sssssssssss sDs ss ss sssss ss DDDD ss ssssssssssssssssφA ssssssssssθssfsss0 ssss ssss sDsDDs θBzz0zzzzsssssssssssφssBsss sss ssGϕ s ss s s s " ysD ss Hfsu} sssss ss " zz sssssss ssss sss/ ys ss ssss0 0 ssss s/ ss DD sssssssssssszθzz0 8@ DDDsss ssss sssssssssssssssss sss sssssssssθsGf s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s z D DD ssss s s s s sss sssssss Bss ssss sss zzz Ass D ss ss ssssssss sHϕ ss ssDD ssss u} ssssssssssssssφzAzz0zzzssss ssssDDDssssssssssssssssssssθf0 sssssssssssφssBss0s ssss ss s s z ysss D0 u} sss } u s s s sss zzzz ss 0 8@/ ysDD ssst0BsDsssss Hf 0s t AD DD ssssssss ss ss D zz Dss sssD DD sssssssss ss θB0 0 sss ssss zzz sτs0 s DD t0a DDsDssDsssss zzzzszzszss f zzzzzzθAs0sss DDssDssssss t0b DDsDssDssssssssssss ssss ss z sD DD ssss DD zzzss ss s ss zzzzzssss u} sssss D 0 u} sssssssssssDsD/" θysf0 s0 s sz s z s " s y z z 0 u} s z s tB 0s tA0 D Kf ss zzz s0 s sDss DD ss zzszzszssτf 0 sssss DDDD s DD s z s s z Kϕ ss zzs s DD DD ss D" zyszzszzzss D" yssss u} ssss / Kf 0 (4.5) Return to the general case. Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 69 Let C be a 2-category and consider C, C 0 two pseudo-categories in C as in (3.1). Suppose T, T 0 , T 00 are pseudo-natural transformations between pseudo-functors from C to C 0 : we define for Φ0 Φ T −→ T 0 −→ T 00 a composition Φ0 Φ as the composition of 2-cells in C, and clearly it is well defined, is associative and has identities. Now for θ, θ0 , θ00 natural transformations between pseudo-functors from C to C 0 , we define for Φ Ψ θ −→ θ0 −→ θ00 a pseudo-composition Ψ ⊗ Φ = m0 hΨ, Φi . Proposition 2. Let C be a 2-category and suppose Ψ, Φ are pseudo-modifications F θ F0 T Φ T0 /G 0 θ / G0 S Ψ S0 /H 00 θ / H0 with F, G, H, F 0 , G0 , H 0 pseudo-functors from C to C 0 (pseudo-categories as in (3.1)), S, T, S 0 , T 0 pseudo-natural transformations and θ, θ0 , θ00 natural transformations as considered above. The formula Ψ ⊗ Φ = m0 hΨ, Φi for pseudo-composition of pseudo-modifications is well defined. Proof. Recall that the composition of pseudo-modifications is given by S ⊗ T = (m0 hs, ti , (σ ⊗ τ )) with (σ ⊗ τ ) given as in (3.8), hence m0 hΨ, Φi : m0 hs, ti −→ m0 hs0 , t0 i is a 2-cell of C as required. Conditions (4.1) are satisfied, d0 m0 ◦ hΨ, Φi = d0 π20 ◦ hΨ, Φi = d0 ◦ Φ = θ0 c0 m ◦ hΨ, Φi = c0 π10 hΨ, Φi = c0 ◦ Ψ = θ000 . To prove commutativity of square (4.2) we use Yoneda Lemma and the following Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 70 diagram, obtained by adapting (4.2) to the present case and filling its interior GG GG GG GG GG G# (1) SSSS SSSS SS) k5 kkkk k k k / kk (2) (3) kk5 k k k kkkkk w; w ww ww w w www / w; ww w ww ww w ww (4) (5) / SSS SSSS SSS) GG GG GG GG GG G# / where hexagons commute by definition of (σ ⊗ τ ) and (σ 0 ⊗ τ 0 ), squares (1) , (3) , (5) commute by naturality of α0 while squares (2) , (4) commute because Ψ, Φ are pseudo-modifications (satisfy (4.4)) together with the fact that pseudo-composition (in C 0 ) satisfies the middle interchange law (1.8). Composition of pseudo-natural transformations is not associative, however there is a special pseudo-modification for each triple of composable pseudo-natural transformations. Proposition 3. Let C be 2-category and suppose F, G, H, K : C −→ C 0 are pseudofunctors in C and that S = (s, σ) , T = (t, τ ) , U = (u, υ) are pseudo-natural transformations as follows S T U F −→ G −→ H −→ K. 0 = α0 hu, t, si is a pseudo-modification The 2-cell αU,T,S F 1 F U ⊗(T ⊗S) α0U,T ,S (U ⊗T )⊗S /K 1 /K , and it is natural in S, T, U, in the sense that the square U ⊗ (T ⊗ S) ϕ⊗(γ⊗δ)y α0 hu,t,si −−−−−→ (U ⊗ T ) ⊗ S (ϕ⊗γ)⊗δ y α0 hu0 ,t0 ,s0 i U 0 ⊗ (T 0 ⊗ S 0 ) −−−−−−−→ (U 0 ⊗ T 0 ) ⊗ S 0 commutes for every pseudo-modification ϕ : U −→ U 0 , γ : T −→ T 0 , δ : S −→ S 0 . Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 71 Proof. The 2-cell α0 hu, t, si is obtained from hu,t,si C0 −→ C10 ×C00 C10 ×C00 C10 −−−−−− → ⇓ α0 C1 , −−−−−−→ and U ⊗ (T ⊗ S) = (m (1 × m) hu, t, si , (υ ⊗ (τ ⊗ σ))) (U ⊗ T ) ⊗ S = (m (m × 1) hu, t, si , ((υ ⊗ τ ) ⊗ σ)) , hence α0 hu, t, si : m (1 × m) hu, t, si −→ m (m × 1) hu, t, si is a 2-cell of C. Conditions (4.1) are satisfied d0 ◦ α0 ◦ hu, t, si = 1d0 π30 hu, t, si = 1d0 s = 1F0 c0 ◦ α0 ◦ hu, t, si = 1c0 π10 hu, t, si = 1c0 u = 1K0 . Commutativity of (4.2) follows from Yoneda Lemma and the commutativity of the following diagram ?? ?? ?? ? / O / ? /O / /? ? ?? ?? ?? ??? ?? ?? ?? ? ??? ?? ?? ?? ?? ? ? / / / /? ?? ?? ?? / where hexagons commute because S, T, U are pseudo-natural transformations, squares commute by naturality and pentagons by coherence. To prove naturality we observe that ((ϕ ⊗ γ) ⊗ δ) · (α0 hu, t, si) = (m0 hm hϕ, γi , δi) · (α0 hu, t, si) = (m0 (m0 × 1) hϕ, γ, δi) · (α0 hu, t, si) = 1m0 (m0 ×1) · α0 ◦ hϕ, γ, δi · 1hu,t,si = α0 ◦ hϕ, γ, δi Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 72 and (α0 hu0 , t0 , s0 i) · (ϕ ⊗ (γ ⊗ δ)) = (α0 hu0 , t0 , s0 i) · (m0 hϕ, m0 hγ, δii) = (α0 hu0 , t0 , s0 i) · (m0 (1 × m0 ) hϕ, γ, δi) = α0 · 1m0 (1×m0 ) ◦ 1hu0 ,t0 ,s0 i hϕ, γ, δi = α0 ◦ hϕ, γ, δi . For every pseudo-functor there is a pseudo-identity pseudo-natural transformation and a pseudo-identity pseudo-modification. Proposition 4. Consider a pseudo-functor F = (F0 , F1 , µF , εF ) : C −→ C 0 in a 2category C (with C, C 0 pseudo-categories in C as in (3.1)). The pair e0 F0 , λ0−1 ρ0 ◦ F1 is a pseudo-natural transformation in PsCat(C) idF = e´F0 , λ0−1 ρ0 F1 : F −→ F, and the 2-cell 1e0 F0 : e0 F0 −→ e0 F0 is a pseudo-modification in PsCat(C) F 1 F idF 1idF idF /F 1 /F . Proof. Clearly e0 F0 : C0 −→ C10 is a morphism of C, and λ0−1 ρ0 F1 : m hF1 , e0 d0 F1 i −→ m0 he0 c0 F1 , F1 i is a 2-cell (that is an isomorphism) of C. Conditions (3.3) and (3.4) are satisfied, d0 e0 F0 = F0 c0 e0 F0 = F0 d0 ◦ λ0−1 ρ0 F1 = d0 ◦ λ0−1 ρ0 ◦ F1 = d0 λ0−1 F1 · (d0 ρ0 F1 ) = (1d0 F1 ) · (1d0 F1 ) = (1d0 F1 ) , and similarly for c0 ◦ λ0−1 ρ0 F1 = 1c0 F1 . Commutativity of (3.5) is obtained using Yoneda Lemma and the commutativity Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 73 of the diagram Fg⊗f ⊗ idF A oo ooo o o o o w oo (Fg ⊗ Ff ) ⊗ idF A II II II II I$ F / idF C ⊗ Fg⊗f PPP u: PPP uu u PPP uu PPP u ' uu id ⊗ (F ⊗ F ) g⊗f FC g f VVVV 4 hhhh VVVV h h h h VVVV hhhh VVVV hhhh VVV* h h h h Fg ⊗ Ff o Fg ⊗ (Ff ⊗ idF A ) o (idF C ⊗ Fg ) ⊗ Ff , : II OOO nn7 II uu OOO nnn II uu n OOO u n II nn uu OO' I$ uu nnn / (Fg ⊗ idF B ) ⊗ Ff Fg ⊗ (idF B ⊗ Ff ) while (3.6) follows in a similar way as observed in the diagram F (idA ) ⊗ idF A rr rrr r r x rr r idF A ⊗ idF A TTTT TTTT TTTT TTTT TT* idF A / idF A ⊗ F (idA ) MMM MMM MMM M& idF A ⊗ idF A . iiii i i i iii iiii tiiii This proves that idF is a pseudo-natural transformation. To prove 1idF = 1e0 F0 is a pseudo-modification we note that 1e0 F0 : e0 F0 −→ e0 F0 is a 2-cell of C, d0 ◦ 1e0 F0 = 1d0 e0 F0 = 1F0 , c0 ◦ 1e´F0 = 1c0 e0 F0 = 1F0 . To prove commutativity of square (4.2) we use Yoneda Lemma and the commutativity of the following square 0 λ0−1 F f ρF f F f ⊗ idF A −−−−−→ idF B ⊗ F f 1id ⊗1F f 1F f ⊗1idF A y y FB . 0 λ0−1 F f ρF f F f ⊗ idF A −−−−−→ idF B ⊗ F f Proposition 5. Let C be a 2-category and suppose F, G : C −→ C 0 are pseudofunctors in C. For every pseudo-natural transformation T = (t, τ ) : F −→ G Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 74 there are two special pseudo-modifications F F /G idG ⊗T 1 T /G 1 λT F F , /G 1 /G T ⊗idF 1 T ρT , with λT = λ0 ◦ t, ρT = ρ0 ◦ t both natural in T . Proof. It is clear that λ0 ◦ t : m0 ht, e0 F0 i −→ t is a 2-cell of C, and d0 ◦ λ0 ◦ t = 1d0 t = 1F0 c0 ◦ λ0 ◦ t = 1c0 t = 1G0 . The commutativity of square (4.2) is obtained from the commutativity of diagram / (idGB ⊗ tB ) ⊗ Ff 9 tt tt t tt tt Gf ⊗ (idGA ⊗ tA ) KK KK KK KK K% (Gf ⊗ idGA ) ⊗ tA NNN NNN NNN NN& (idGB ⊗ Gf ) ⊗ tA −/ idGB eee hh hhhheeeeeeeeeee h h h h e hhhh eeeee rethheheheheeeeee idGB ⊗ (tB ⊗ Ff ) 9 ss ss s ss ss ⊗ (Gf ⊗ tA ) Gf ⊗ tA 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 / tB ⊗ Ff In order to prove naturality of λT consider a internal pseudo-modification F H θ T Φ T0 /G 0 θ /K as defined in (4.1); then, on the one hand we have Φ · (λ0 ◦ t) = 1C10 ◦ Φ · (λ0 ◦ 1t ) = 1C10 · λ0 ◦ (Φ · 1t ) = λ0 ◦ Φ and on the other hand we have (λ0 ◦ t0 ) · (m0 he0 θ00 , Φi) = (λ0 ◦ t0 ) · m0 e0 c0 , 1C10 ◦ Φ = λ0 · 1m0 De0 c0 ,1 0 E ◦ (1t0 · Φ) C1 = λ0 ◦ Φ. The proof on rho is similar. The three last propositions lead us to the following theorem. Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 75 Theorem 3. Let C be a 2-category, and consider C, C 0 two pseudo-categories in C. The data: • objects: pseudo-functors from C to C 0 ; • morphisms: natural transformations (between pseudo-functors from C to C 0 ); • pseudo-morphisms: pseudo-natural transformations (between pseudo-functors from C to C 0 ); • cells: pseudo-modifications (between such natural and pseudo-natural transformations); form a pseudo-category (in Cat). Proof. Natural transformations and pseudo-functors form a category: theorem 1. pseudo-modifications and pseudo-natural transformations also form a category: the composition is associative and has identities (that inherit the structure of 2-cells of the ambient 2-category). For every pseudo-natural transformation T = (t, τ ) : F −→ G, the identity pseudo-modification is 1T = 1t F 1 F T 1T T /G 1 /G . For each pair of pseudo-composable pseudo-modifications Φ, Ψ, there is a (well defined - proposition 2) pseudo-composition Φ ⊗ Ψ = m0 hΦ, Ψi satisfying (1.8) (ΦΦ0 ) ⊗ (ΨΨ0 ) = m0 hΦΦ0 , ΨΨ0 i (Φ ⊗ Ψ) (Φ0 ⊗ Ψ0 ) = (m0 hΦ, Ψi) (m0 hΦ0 , Ψ0 i) = (1m0 1m0 ) ◦ (hΦ, Ψi hΦ0 , Ψ0 i) = m0 hΦΦ0 , ΨΨ0 i ; and 1T ⊗S = 1T ⊗ 1S , 1mht,si = 1m ◦ 1ht,si = 1m ◦ h1t , 1s i = m h1t , 1s i . For each natural transformation θ : F −→ G there is a pseudo-modification F θ G idF idθ idG /F θ /G with idθ = e0 θ0 , satisfying id1F = e0 1F0 = 1e0 F0 = 1idF , idθ0 θ = e0 ◦ (θ00 θ0 ) = (e0 ◦ θ00 ) (e0 ◦ θ0 ) = idθ0 idθ . Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 76 By Proposition 3 there is a special pseudo-modification αT,U,S = α hT, U, Si for each triple of composable pseudo-natural transformations T, U, S, natural in each component and satisfying the pentagon coherence condition. By Proposition 5 there are two special pseudo-modifications λT , ρT to each pseudo-natural transformation T : F −→ G, natural in T and satisfying the triangle coherence condition. 5. Conclusion and final remarks The mathematical object PsCat that we have just defined has the following structure: • objects: A, B, C, ... • morphisms: f : A −→ B, ... • 2-cells: θ : f −→ g, ...(f, g : A −→ B) • pseudo-cells: f • tetra cells: T / g , ... /g f T f0 0 Φ θ T θ / g0 0 , ... where objects, morphisms and 2-cells form a 2-category and for each pair of objects A, B, the morphisms, 2-cells, pseudo-cells and tetra cells from A to B form a pseudo-category. Two questions arise at this moment: - What is happening from PsCat(B, C)×PsCat(A, B) to PsCat(A, C)? - What is the relation between PsCat(A × B, C) and PsCat(A,PsCAT(B, C))? The answer to the second question is easy to find out. If starting with a pseudofunctor in PsCat(A × B, C), say h : A × B −→ C, by going to PsCat A, C B and coming back we will obtain either h (c, g) ⊗ h (f, b) or h (f, d) ⊗ h (a, g) Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 77 instead of h (f, g) as displayed in the diagram below (a, b) (f,g) (c, d) h(f,b) / h(c, b) h(a, b) FF FF FF FF h(f,g)µ FF +3 h(c,g) h(a,g) FF FF FF µ FF " / h(c, d) h(a, d) h(f,d) And since they are all isomorphic via µ and τ we have that the relation is an equivalence of categories. A similar phenomena happens when trying to define horizontal composition of pseudo-natural transformations (while trying to answer the first question): there are two equally good ways to define a horizontal composition and they differ by an isomorphism. Let C be a 2-category and C, C 0 , C 00 pseudo-categories in C, consider S, T pseudonatural transformations as in F F0 G G −−−−→ −−−−→ C ↓ T C 0 ↓ S C 00 −−−−→ −−−− → 0 there are two possibilities to define horizontal composition S ◦w1 T = m00 hsG0 , F1 t0 i and S ◦w2 T = m00 hG01 t, sF0 i as displayed in the following picture e C1 ←−−−− C0 F1 yG1 .t F0 yG0 e0 C10 ←−−−− C00 . F10 yG01 .s F00 yG00 e00 C100 ←−−−− C000 Hence we have two isomorphic functors from PsCat(B, C)×PsCat(A, B) to PsCat(A, C) both defining a horizontal composition. We note that this behaviour, of composition beeing defined up to isomorphism, also occurs while trying to compose homotopies. So one can expect further relations between the theory of pseudo-categories and homotopy theory to be investigated. For instance the category Top itself may be viewed as a structure with objects (spaces), morphisms (continuous mappings), 2-cells (homotopy classes of homotopies), pseudo-cells (simple homotopies) and tetra cells (homotopies between homotopies). Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, vol. 1(1), 2006 78 References [1] J. Bénabou, Introduction to Bicategories, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, number 47, pages 1-77, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1967. [2] J.W. Gray, Formal Category Teory: Adjointness for 2-categories, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag, 1974 [3] T. Leinster, Higher Operads, Higher Categories, London Mathematical Society Lecture Notes Series, Cambridge University Press, 2003 (electronic version). [4] S. MacLane, Categories for the working Mathematician, Springer-Verlag, 1998, 2nd edition. [5] N. Martins-Ferreira, Internal Bicategories in Ab, Preprint CM03/I-24, Aveiro Universitiy, 2003. [6] N. Martins-Ferreira, Internal Weak Categories in Additive 2-Categories with Kernels, Fields Institute Communications, Volume 43, p.387-410, 2004. [7] N. Martins-Ferreira, Weak categories in Grp, Unpublished. [8] R. Paré and M. Grandis, Adjoints for Double Categories, Cahiers Topologie et Géométrie Diferéntielle Catégoriques, XLV(3),2004, 193-240. [9] R. Paré and M. Grandis, Limits in Double Categories, Cahiers Topologie et Géométrie Diferéntielle Catégoriques, XL(3), 1999, 162-220. [10] J. Power, 2-Categories, BRICS Notes Series, NS-98-7. [11] R.H. Street, Cosmoi of internal categories, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 258, 1980, 271-318 [12] R.H. Street, Fibrations in Bicategories, Cahiers Topologie et Géométrie Diferéntielle Catégoriques, 21:111-120, 1980. http://www.emis.de/ZMATH/ http://www.ams.org/mathscinet This article may be accessed via WWW at http://jhrs.rmi.acnet.ge N. Martins-Ferreira nelsonmf@estg.ipleiria.pt http://www.estg.ipleiria.pt/~nelsonmf Polytechnic Institute of Leiria, Portugal