Enriched Cauchy completions and underlying categories

The ordinary Cauchy completion ¯C of a small category C satisfies a number of conditions: Every idempotent in ¯C splits, there’s an equivalence of categories [Cop,Set][¯Cop,Set], etc…

There’s also a notion of Cauchy completion for enriched categories, my questions are about it:

1 – Let X be a V-enriched category (where V is a closed symmetric monoidal category with all limits and colimits), what properties does its enriched Cauchy completion ¯X satisfy? Like is there an equivalence [Xop,V][¯Xop,V], etc?

2 – What can be said about the underlying categories of X and ¯X (X0 and ¯X0)?? Is ¯X0 the ordinary Cauchy completion of X? Do we have [Xop0,Set][¯Xop0,Set], etc?

I just wanted to ask before I go about trying to answer this myself.


It works the other way around — you should have tried to answer your question by yourself before you posted it here 🙂

  1. Yes, there is an equivalence [Xop,V][¯Xop,V]. You may find more details in “Basic Concepts of Enriched Category Theory” by M. Kelly (Chapter 5.5).

  2. No. The name “Cauchy completion” has been chosen to suggest that it is a generalization of the usual concept of Cauchy completion for metric spaces. Indeed, if you take a generalized Lawvere metric space X, then the usual completion of X under Cauchy sequences coincide with the Cauchy completion of X, when X is thought of as a category enriched over poset [0,] with monoidal structure 0,+. On the other hand, the underlying category of X is always Cauchy complete in the sense of ordinary categories.

Source : Link , Question Author : Richard Jennings , Answer Author : Michal R. Przybylek

Leave a Comment