# Homotopy theory of non-symmetric operads

Fernando Muro Universidad de Sevilla, Facultad de Matemáticas, Departamento de Álgebra, Avda. Reina Mercedes s/n, 41012 Sevilla, Spain
###### Abstract.

We endow categories of non-symmetric operads with natural model structures. We work with no restriction on our operads and only assume the usual hypotheses for model categories with a symmetric monoidal structure. We also study categories of algebras over these operads in enriched non-symmetric monoidal model categories.

###### Key words and phrases:
operad, algebra, model category, enriched -category
###### 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
18D50, 55U35, 18D10, 18D35, 18D20
The author was partially supported by the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science under the MEC-FEDER grants MTM2007-63277 and MTM2010-15831, and by the Government of Catalonia under the grant SGR-119-2009.

## 1. Introduction

Operads are well-known devices encoding the laws of algebras defined by multilinear operations and relations, e.g. there are operads Ass, Com and Lie whose algebras are associative, commutative and Lie algebras, respectively. Morphisms of operads codify relations between different kinds of algebras, e.g. there are morphisms telling us that any commutative algebra is an associative alegbra, and that commutators in an associative algebra yield a Lie algebra.

There are two kinds of operads: symmetric and non-symmetric operads. Symmetric operads are needed whenever it is necessary to permute variables in order to describe the laws of the corresponding algebras, e.g. Com and Lie. Non-symmetric operads are specially useful to deal with algebras in non-symmetric monoidal categories, e.g. given a commutative ring and a set which is not a singleton, the category of -modules with object set , which are collections of -modules indexed by , , has a non-symmetric tensor product,

 (M⊗SN)(x,y)=⨁z∈SM(z,y)⊗kN(x,z),

whose associative algebras, i.e. algebras over the operad Ass, are -linear categories with object set .

Any object in a symmetric monoidal category , such as the category of -modules, has an endomorphism symmetric operad in such that, if is another symmetric operad in , the set of -algebra structures on is the set of symmetric operad morphisms . If belongs to a non-symmetric monoidal category enriched over , such as the category of -modules with object set , then there is a non-symmetric operad in such that the set of algebra structures on over a non-symmetric operad in is the set of non-symmetric operad morphisms (Definition LABEL:eop).

When the underlying symmetric monoidal category carries homotopical information, e.g. if we replace -modules with differential graded -modules, one is often more interested in a space of -algebra structures on rather than a plain set. Such a space can be constructed by using the powerful machinery developed by Dwyer and Kan [slc, csl, fcha] provided we can place the operads and in an appropriate model category of operads.

Model categories of operads were first cosidered by Hinich in the differential graded context [haha, ehaha], and by Berger and Moerdijk in a more general setting [ahto]. They dealt with symmetric operads and showed that restrictive hypotheses are necessary to endow the category of all operads with an appropriate model category structure, e.g. when is a -algebra or when the symmetric monoidal structure in is cartesian closed and there is a symmetric monoidal fibrant replacement functor.

Motivated by our interest in spaces of differential graded category structures, we consider the non-symmetric case, which surprisingly enough does not need any restrictive hypothesys, just usual hypotheses for model categories with a monoidal structure [ammmc].

###### Theorem 1.1.

Let be a cofibrantly generated closed symmetric monoidal model category. Assume that satisfies the monoid axiom. Moreover, suppose that there are sets of generating cofibrations and generating trivial cofibrations in with presentable sources. Then the category of non-symmetric operads in is a cofibrantly generated model category such that a morphism in is a weak equivalence (resp. fibration) if and only if is a weak equivalence (resp. fibration) in for all . Moreover, if is right proper then so is . Furthermore, if is combinatorial then is also combinatorial.

This theorem can be applied to all examples in [ammmc], see also the references therein:

1. Complexes of modules over a commutative ring with the usual tensor product of complexes.

2. Simplicial -modules with the levelwise tensor product .

3. Modules over a finite-dimensional Hopf algebra over a field with the tensor product over , e.g. the group-ring of a finite group .

4. Symmetric spectra with their smash product, and more generally modules over a commutative ring spectrum.

5. -spaces with Lydakis’ smash product.

6. Simplicial functors with their smash product.

7. -modules with their smash product.

In particular, Theorem 1.1 will also be useful to study spaces of spectral category structures.

###### Remark 1.2.

Recall from [adamekrosicky, Definition 1.13 (2)] that an object of is presentable if there exists a cardinal such that the representable functor commutes with -filtered colimits in . Presentable objects are also called small or compact in some references. All objects are presentable in many categories of interest, e.g. in all combinatorial model categories. Actually, up to set theoretical principles any cofibrantly generated model category is Quillen equivalent to a combinatorial model category [cgmc].

Categories of algebras over symmetric operads do not always have a model structure with fibrations and weak equivalences defined in the underlying category. Sufficient conditions can be found in [ahto]. In the framework of non-symmetric operads they do. When both algebras and operads live in the same ambient symmetric monoidal model category , satisfying the monoid axiom, this has been recently proved by J. E. Harper [htmommc, Theorem 1.2]. We here extend this result to algebras in a monoidal model category satisfying the monoid axiom and appropriately enriched over . This is necessary, for instance, to construct model categories of enrieched categories, of enriched -categories, or of any other categorified algebraic structure, see Section LABEL:appl.

###### Theorem 1.3.

Let and be cofibrantly generated biclosed monoidal model categories. Suppose is symmetric and has a -algebra structure given by a strong braided monoidal functor to the center of , , such that the composite functor

 V\lx@stackrelz⟶Z(C)⟶C

is a left Quillen functor. Moreover, assume that and satisfy the monoid axiom (see Definitions LABEL:max and LABEL:nsmax). Furthermore, suppose that has sets of generating cofibrations and generating trivial cofibrations with presentable source. Let be a non-symmetric operad in . The category of -algebras in is a cofibrantly generated model category such that an -algebra morphism is a weak equivalence (resp. fibration) if and only if  is a weak equivalence (resp. fibration) in . Moreover, if is right proper then so is . Furthermore, if is combinatorial then is also combinatorial.

The notion of monoidal model category in [ammmc, Definition 3.1] makes sense with no modification in the non-symmetric context, see Definition LABEL:defm.

 ϕ∗:AlgC(P)⟶AlgC(O)

by restricting the action of to along . This functor is the identity on underlying objects in , hence it preserves fibrations and weak equivalences. Moreover, the functor has a left adjoint , therefore we have a Quillen adjunction,

 (1.4)
You are adding the first comment!
How to quickly get a good reply:
• Give credit where it’s due by listing out the positive aspects of a paper before getting into which changes should be made.
• Be specific in your critique, and provide supporting evidence with appropriate references to substantiate general statements.
• Your comment should inspire ideas to flow and help the author improves the paper.

The better we are at sharing our knowledge with each other, the faster we move forward.
The feedback must be of minimum 40 characters and the title a minimum of 5 characters

340755

How to quickly get a good answer:
• Keep your question short and to the point
• Check for grammar or spelling errors.
• Phrase it like a question
Test
Test description