cycle construction for symmetric monoidal categories #2134
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: Ali Caglayan <[email protected]> <!-- ps-id: 93b01a23-155d-45c4-bd9b-9cf39a777d70 -->
Alizter
commented
Nov 7, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In this PR, we introduce what I've termed the "cycle construction" for symmetric monoidal categories. Like the "twist construction" it is a slicker way to build symmetric monoidal categories without having to give all the data from the beginning. But this time, instead of asking for a twist map ABC -> BAC we ask for a cycle map ABC -> CAB. We then have variants of the hexagon and pentagon axioms which appear to be slicker than in the twist construction.
TODO