MATTER: International Journal of Science and Technology

ISSN 2454-5880

A. Behera et al.
Special Issue, 2015, pp. 48-63

A CATEGORICAL CONSTRUCTION OF MINIMAL MODEL
A. Behera
Department of Mathematics, National Institute of Technology, Rourkela - 769008 (India),
abehera@nitrkl.ac.in
S. B. Choudhury
Department of Mathematics, National Institute of Technology, Rourkela - 769008 (India),
512ma6009@nitrkl.ac.in
M. Routaray
Department of Mathematics, National Institute of Technology, Rourkela - 769008 (India),
512ma302@nitrkl.ac.in

Abstract
Deleanu, Frei and Hilton have developed the notion of generalized Adams completion in a
categorical context; they have also suggested the dual notion, namely, Adams cocompletion of
an object in a category. The concept of rational homotopy theory was first characterized by
Quillen. In fact in rational homotopy theory Sullivan introduced the concept of minimal model.
In this note under a reasonable assumption, the minimal model of a 1-connected differential
graded algebra can be expressed as the Adams cocompletion of the differential graded algebra
with respect to a chosen set in the category of 1-connected differential graded algebras (in short
d.g.a.’s) over ?ℎ? ????? ?? ????????? and d.g.a.-homomorphisms.
Keywords
Category

of

Fractions,

Calculus

of

Right

Fractions,

Grothendieck

Universe,

Adamscocompletion, Differential Graded Algebra, Minimal Model.

1. Introduction
It is to be emphasized that many algebraic and geometrical constructions in Algebraic
Topology, Differential Topology, Differentiable Manifolds, Algebra, Analysis, Topology, etc.,
© 2015 The author and GRDS Publishing. All rights reserved.
Available Online at: http://grdspublishing.org/MATTER/matter.html

48

MATTER: International Journal of Science and Technology
ISSN 2454-5880

can be viewed as Adams completions or cocompletions of objects in suitable categories, with
respect to carefully chosen sets of morphisms.
The notion of generalized completion (Adams completion) arose from a categorical
completion process suggested by Adams, 1973, 1975. Originally this was considered for
admissible categories and generalized homology (or cohomology) theories. Subsequently, this
notion has been considered in a more general framework by Deleanu, Frei & Hilton, 1974, where
an arbitrary category and an arbitrary set of morphisms of the category are considered; moreover
they have also suggested the dual notion, namely the cocompletion (Adams cocompletion) of an
object in a category.
The central idea of this note is to investigate a case showing how an algebraic
geometrical construction is characterized in terms of Adams cocompletion.

2. Adams completion
We recall the definitions of Grothendieck universe, category of fractions, calculus of
right fractions, Adams cocompletion and some characterizations of Adams cocompletion.

2.1 Definition.Schubert, 1972
A Grothendeick universe (or simply universe) is a collection ? of sets such that the
following axioms are satisfied:

U (1):

If {?? : ? ∈ ? } is a family of sets belongingto ?, then⋃?∈I ?? is an element of ?.

U (2):

If ? ∈ ?, then {?} ∈ ?.

U (3):

If ? ∈ ? and ? ∈ ? then ? ∈ ?.

U (4):

If ? is a set belonging to?, then ?(?), the power set of ?, is an element of?.

U (5):

If ? and ? are elements of ?, then {?, ?}, the ordered pair (?, ?) and ? × ?

are elements of ?.
We fix a universe ? that contains ℕ the set of natural numbers (and so ℤ, ℚ, ℝ, ℂ ).

© 2015 The author and GRDS Publishing. All rights reserved.
Available Online at: http://grdspublishing.org/MATTER/matter.html

49

MATTER: International Journal of Science and Technology
ISSN 2454-5880

2.2 Definition.Schubert, 1972
A category ? is said to be a small?-category, ? being a fixed Grothendeick universe, if
the following conditions hold:
S(1) :

The objects of ? form a set which is an element of ?.

S (2):

For each pair (?, ?) of objects of?, the set Hom(?, ?) is an element of ?.

2.3 Definition.Schubert, 1972
Let ? be any arbitrary category and
fractions

of ?

? a set of morphisms of

with respect to ? is a category denoted by

?.

?[? −1 ]

A category of
together with a

functor?? ∶ ? → ?[? −1 ]having the following properties:
CF (1): For each ? ∈ ?, ?? (?) is an isomorphism in?[ ? −1 ].
CF(2) : ?? is universal with respect to this property:If? ∶ ? → ? is a functor such
that?(?)is an isomorphism in?, foreach? ∈ ?,then there exists a unique
functor? ∶ ?[? −1 ] → ?such that? = ??? .

Thus we have the following

commutative diagram:

?
?↓

??

?[? −1 ]

↙?

?
Figure 1
2.4 Note.
For the explicit construction of the category

?[ ? −1 ], we refer to Schubert, 1972. We

content ourselves merely with the observation that the objects of ?[ ? −1 ] are same as those of
? and in the case when ? admits a calculus of left (right) fractions, the category ?[ ? −1 ] can
be described very nicely Gabriel &Zisman, 1967, Schubert, 1972.

2.5 Definition. Schubert, 1972
A family ? of morphisms in a category ?is saidto admit a calculus of right fractions if
(a)

any diagram

© 2015 The author and GRDS Publishing. All rights reserved.
Available Online at: http://grdspublishing.org/MATTER/matter.html

50

MATTER: International Journal of Science and Technology
ISSN 2454-5880

?
↓?
?

?

?

Figure 2
in?with ? ∈ ?can be completed to a diagram
?

?

?

?↓

↓?

?

?

?

Figure 3
with? ∈ ?and?? = ??,
(b)

given ?

?

→ ?

?


?

?

?with? ∈ ?and?? = ??,there is a morphism? ∶

?

? → ?in ?such that?? = ??.

A simple characterization for a family

?

to admit a calculus of right fractions is the

following.

2.6 Theorem. Deleanu, et al., 1974
Let ? be a closed family of morphisms of?satisfying

(a)

if ?? ∈ ? and ? ∈ ?, then ? ∈ ?,

(b)

any diagram

↓?


?

Figure 4
in? with

? ∈ ?, can be embedded in a weak pull-back diagram

© 2015 The author and GRDS Publishing. All rights reserved.
Available Online at: http://grdspublishing.org/MATTER/matter.html

51

MATTER: International Journal of Science and Technology
ISSN 2454-5880

?

?↓


↓?


?

Figure 5
with? ∈ ?.
Then ? admits a calculus of right fractions.

2.7 Remark.
There are some set-theoretic difficulties in constructing the category?[? −1 ]; these
difficulties may be overcome by making some mild hypotheses and using Grothendeick
universes. Precisely speaking, the main logical difficulty involved in the construction of a
category of fractions and its use, arises from the fact that if the category ?

belongs to a

particular universe, the category?[? −1 ] would, in general belongs to a higher universe Schubert,
1972.

In most applications, however, it is necessary that we remain within the given initial

universe. This logical difficulty can be overcome by making some kind of assumptions which
would ensure that the category of fractions remains within the same universe Deleanu, 1975.
Also the following theorem shows that if ? admits a calculus of left (right) fractions, then the
category of fractions ?[? −1 ] remains within the same universe as to the universe to which the
category ? belongs.

2.8 Theorem.Nanda, 1980
Let ? be a small ?-category and ? a set of morphisms of ? that admits a calculus
of left (right) fractions. Then ?[? −1 ] is a small ?-category.

2.9 Definition. Deleanu, et al., 1974
Let ? be an arbitrary category and?a set of morphisms of ?. Let ?[? −1 ] denote the
category of fractions of ? with respect?and ?: ? → ?[? −1 ]be the canonical functor. Let ?
denote the category of sets and functions. Then for a given object ? of ?, ?[? −1 ](?, −) ∶ ? →
© 2015 The author and GRDS Publishing. All rights reserved.
Available Online at: http://grdspublishing.org/MATTER/matter.html

52

MATTER: International Journal of Science and Technology
ISSN 2454-5880

?defines a covariant functor. If this functor is representable by an object

?? of?,

i.e.,?[? −1 ](?, −) ≅ ?(?? , −).Then ?? is called the (generalized)Adams cocompletionof? with
respect to the set of morphisms ? or simply the ?-cocompletion of?. We shall often refer to ??
as the cocompletion of

? Deleanu, et al., 1974.

We recall some results on the existence of Adams cocompletion.

We state

Deleanu’stheoremDeleanu, 1975 that under certain conditions, global Adams cocompletion of an
object always exists.

2.10 Theorem. Deleanu, 1975
Let ?be a complete small?-category

(?is a fixed Grothendeick universe) and?a set of

morphisms of?that admits a calculus of right fractions. Suppose that the following compatibility
condition with product is satisfied: if each?? ∶ ?? → ?? , ? ∈ ?, is an element of?, then
∏?∈? ?? ∶ ∏?∈? ?? → ∏?∈? ?? is an element of ?.Then every object?of ?has an Adams
cocompletion?? with respect to the set of morphisms?.
The concept of Adams cocompletion can be characterized in terms of a couniversal
property.

2.11 Definition. Deleanu, et al., 1974
Given aset ? of morphisms of ?,

we define?̅, the saturation of

? as the set of all

morphisms ? in ? such that ?(?) is an isomorphism in ?[? −1 ]. ?is said to be saturated if
? = ?̅.

2.12 Proposition. Deleanu, et al., 1974
A family ? of morphisms of?is saturated if and only if thereexists a factor ? ∶ ? →
?such that?is the collection of morphisms?such that?? is invertible.
Deleanu, Frei and Hilton have shown that if the set of morphisms ?is saturated then the
Adams cocompletion of a space is characterized by a certain couniversal property.

© 2015 The author and GRDS Publishing. All rights reserved.
Available Online at: http://grdspublishing.org/MATTER/matter.html

53

MATTER: International Journal of Science and Technology
ISSN 2454-5880

2.13 Theorem. Deleanu, et al., 1974
Let ? be a saturated family of morphisms of ? admitting a calculus of right fractions.
Then an object ?? of ? is the ?-cocompletion of the object ? with respect to

? if and only

if there exists a morphism? ∶ ?? → ?in ?which is couniversal with respect to morphisms of ?
: given a morphism? ∶ ? → ?in ?there exists a unique morphism? ∶ ?? → ?in ? such
that?? = ?. In other words, the following diagram is commutative:
?

??

?↓

?

↗?

?
Figure 6
For most of the application it is essential that the morphism ? ∶ ?? → ? has to be in
?; this is the case when ? is saturated and the result is as follows:

2.14 Theorem. Deleanu, et al., 1974
Let ? be a saturated family of morphisms of ? and let every object of
?-cocompletion. Then the morphism

? ∶ ?? → ? belongs to

morphisms to ?-cocomplete objects and couniversal for morphisms in

? admit an

? and is universal for
?.

3. The category ???
Let ??? be the category of 1-connected differential graded algebras over ℚ (in short
d.g.a.) and d.g.a.-homomorphisms. Let

?

denote the set of all d.g.a.-epimorphisms in

???which induce homology isomorphisms in all dimensions. The following results will be
required in the sequel.

3.1 Proposition.
?Is saturated.

Proof.The proof is evident from Proposition 2.12.

© 2015 The author and GRDS Publishing. All rights reserved.
Available Online at: http://grdspublishing.org/MATTER/matter.html

54

MATTER: International Journal of Science and Technology
ISSN 2454-5880

3.2Proposition.
?admits a calculus of right fractions.
Proof.Clearly, ? is a closed family of morphisms of the category ???. We shall verify
conditions

(?) and (?) of Theorem 2.6. Let?, ? ∈ ?. We show that if ?? ∈ ? and? ∈ ?,

then? ∈ ?. Clearly ?

is an epimorphism.We have(??)∗ = ?∗ ?∗ and ?∗ are both homology

isomorphisms implying?∗ is a homology isomorphism. Thus ? ∈ ?. Hence condition (?)

of

Theorem 2.6 holds.
To prove condition (?) of Theorem 2.6 consider the diagram
?
↓?
?


?

?

Figure 7
In??? with? ∈ ?.We assert that the above diagram can be completed to a weak pull-back
diagram
?

?

?↓
?

?
↓?


?

?

Figure 8
In???with? ∈ ?. Since?, ? and?are in???

we write? = Σ?≥0 ?? , ? = Σ?≥0 ?? ,? =

Σ?≥0 ?? ,? = Σ?≥0 ?? ,? = Σ?≥0 ?? and?? ∶ ?? → ?? ,?? ∶ ?? → ?? ,are d.g.a.-homomorphisms.
Let ?? = {(?, ?) ∈ ?? × ?? ∶ ?? (?) = ?? (?)} ⊂ ?? × ?? .
We have to show that? = Σ?≥0 ?? is a differential graded algebra. Let?? ∶ ?? →
?? and?? ∶ ?? → ?? be the usual projections. Let? = Σ?≥0 ?? and? = Σ?≥0 ?? . Clearly the
above diagram is commutative. It is required to show that ? is a d.g.a..Define a multiplication
in ? in the following way: (?, ?) ∙ (?′ , ? ′ ) = (??′ , ?? ′ ),where(?, ?) ∈ ?? , (?′ , ? ′ ) ∈ ?? .Let
? ? = Σ?≥0 ??? ,

??? ∶ ?? → ??+1 and? ? = Σ?≥0 ??? ,??? ∶ ?? → ??+1 .Define

© 2015 The author and GRDS Publishing. All rights reserved.
Available Online at: http://grdspublishing.org/MATTER/matter.html

??? ∶ ?? →
55

MATTER: International Journal of Science and Technology
ISSN 2454-5880

??+1by

the

??? (?, ?) = (??? (?), ??? (?)),

rule

(?, ?) ∈ ?? .Let?? = Σ?≥0 ??? .Since? ? ?? (?, ?) = (? ? ? ? (?), ? ? ?? (?)) = (0,0)for

all

(?, ?) ∈ ? we have that ?? is a differential. Next we show that? ? is a derivation: For
(?1 , ?1 ) ∈ ??
and(?2 , ?2 ) ∈ ?? ,?? ((?1 , ?1 ) ∙ (?2 , ?2 )) = ?? (?1 ?2 , ?1 ?2 ) = (? ? (?1 ?2 ), ? ? (?1 ?2 )) =
(? ? (?1 ) ∙ (?2 ) + (−1)? (?1 ) ∙ ? ? (?2 ), ? ? (?1 ) ∙ (?2 ) + (−1)? (?1 ) ∙ ? ? (?2 )) = (? ? (?1 ) ∙ ?2 ,
? ? (?1 ) ∙ ?2 ) + ((−1)? ?1 ∙ ? ? (?2 ), (−1)? ?1 ∙ ? ? (?2 )) = (? ? (?1 ),
? ? (?1 )) ∙ (?2 , ?2 ) +((−1)? ?1 , (−1)? ?1 ) ∙ (? ? (?2 ), ? ? (?2 )) = ? ? (?1 , ?1 ) ∙ (?2 , ?2 ) +
(−1)? (?1 , ?1 ) ∙ ?? (?2 , ?2 ).
Thus ? becomes a d.g.a..
We show that ? is 1-connected, i.e., ?0 (?) ≅ ℚand?1 (?) ≅ 0. We have ?0 (?) =
?0 (?)⁄?0 (?) = ?0 (?) = {(?, ?) ∈ ?0 (?) × ?0 (?) ∶ ?0 (?) = ?0 (?)}.Let
1? ∈ ?.

Then?? (1? , 1? ) = (? ? (1? ), ? ? (1? )) = 0implies

1? ∈ ?

and

that(1? , 1? ) ∈ ?0 (?).?0 (?) =

?0 (?) ≅ ℚimplies that ?0 (?) = ℚ1? .Similarly,?0 (?) = ?0 (?) ≅ ℚimplies that ?0 (?) =
ℚ1? .Thus (?, ?) ∈ ?0 (?) = ?0 (?) ⊂ ?0 (?) × ?0 (?)if and only if? = ?1? and? = ?1? for
some ? ∈ ℚ. Thus?0 (?) ≅ ℚ.
In order to show?1 (?) ≅ 0, let(?, ?) ∈ ?1 (?). This implies that? ∈ ?1 (?),? ∈
?1 (?)and?1 (?) = ?1 (?). Sinc?is 1-connected we have?1 (?) ≅ 0, i.e., ?1 (?)⁄?1 (?) = ?1 (?);
hence

? = ?0? (?′ ), ?′ ∈ ?0 .

Similarly

since?is

1-connected

we

have?1 (?) ≅ 0,

i.e.,?1 (?)⁄?1 (?) = ?1 (?);hence? = ?0? (? ′ ), ? ′ ∈ ?0 . Now ?1 (?) = ?1 (?),i.e., ?1 (?0? (?′ )) =
?1 (?0? (? ′ )).This

gives?0? ?0 (?′ ) = ?0? ?0 (? ′ ),i.e.,?0? (?0 (?′ ) − ?0 (? ′ )) = 0.Thus?0 (?′ ) −

?0 (? ′ ) ∈ ?0 (?).But ? ∈ ?. Hence ?∗ ∶ ?0 (?) → ?0 (?)
?0 (?) → ?0 (?)

is an isomorphism.

?0 (?̃ ) = ?0 (?′ ) − ?0 (? ′ ).Moreover

is an isomorphism, i.e., ?0 ∶

Hence there exists an element ?̃ ∈ ?0 (?)such that

?0? (?′ , ?̃ + ? ′ ) = (?0? (?′ ), ?0? (?̃ ) + ?0? (? ′ ))= (?0? (?′ ),

0 + ?0? (? ′ ))= (?0? (?′ ), ?0? (? ′ ) = (?, ?)showing that(a, c) ∈ ?1 (?). Thus?1 (?) ≅ 0.
Clearly

?is a d.g.a.-epimorphism. We show that?∗ ∶ ?∗ (?) → ?∗ (?)is an

isomorphism. First we show that ?∗ ∶ ?∗ (?) → ?∗ (?) is a monomorphism. The hollowing
commutative diagram will be used in the sequel.

© 2015 The author and GRDS Publishing. All rights reserved.
Available Online at: http://grdspublishing.org/MATTER/matter.html

56

MATTER: International Journal of Science and Technology
ISSN 2454-5880



??−2



??−2

?
??−2

??−1

??−2

??−2
?
↓ ??−2

?
??−2

??−1

??−1

?
??−1

??

??−2


??−1

??−1

?
↓ ??−1

?
??−1

??

??


??

??



Figure 9
?? ∶ ?? → ?? is the usual projection, we have

Since

?? (?, ?) = ?

for every

(?, ?) ∈ ?? .

Hence the algebra homomorphism ?∗ ∶ ?? (?) → ?? (?) is given by ?∗ [(?, ?)] = [?? (?, ?)] =
[?]for

[(?, ?)] ∈ ?? (?).

We

note

that

?? (?)

=

?? (?)⁄?? (?) ⊂ (?? (?) × ?? (?) )⁄(?? (?) × ?? (?)).Hence
?? (?) = (?? (?̅) × ?? (?̅ ))⁄(?? (?̅) × ?? (?̅ ))
for some?̅? ⊂ ??

and ??̅ ⊂ ?? . For any [(?, ?)] ∈ ?? (?) we have [(?, ?)] = (?, ?) +

?? (?) = (?, ?) + (?? (?̅) × ?? (?̅ )),(?, ?) ∈ ?? (?) ⊂ ?? .

? (? ′ ′ )
Then(?, ?) + ??−1
,? ∈

? (? ′ ′ )
(?, ?) + ?? (?), for every ??−1
, ? ∈ ?? (?)where (?′ , ? ′ ) ∈ ??−1 ⊂ ?? , i.e., (?, ?) +
? (? ′ ′ )
??−1
,?
? (? ′ ′ )
every??−1
,?

?
? (? ′
(?, ?) + (??−1
), ??−1
(? ′ )) ∈ (?, ?) + (?? (?̅) × ?? (?̅ )),

=
=

? (? ′
?
(??−1
), ??−1
(? ′ )) ∈ ?? (?̅) × ?? (?̅ ).

for

? (?′ ),
Thus(? + ??−1
?+

?
?
? (? ′ ),
??−1
(? ′ )) ∈ (?, ?) + (?? (?̅) × ?? (?̅ )), i.e.,[(? + ??−1
? + ??−1
(? ′ )]= [(?, ?)] ∈ ?? (?).
?
? (? ′ )
We note that [?] = [? + ??−1
]and[?] = [? + ??−1
(? ′ )].

Now let[(?1 , ?1 )], [(?2 , ?2 )] ∈ ?? (?)and assume that ?∗ [(?1 , ?1 )] = ?∗ [(?2 , ?2 )]; this
gives[?1 ] = [?2 ],

?
?
[?1 + ??−1
(?′ )] = [?2 + ??−1
(?′ )].

i.e.

? (? ′ ), ?
Since(?1 , ?1 ), (?2 , ?2 ), (??−1
??−1 (? ′ )) ∈ ?? , we have ?? (?1 ) = ?? (?1), ?? (?2 ) = ?? (?2)
?
?
and?? ??−1
(?′ ) = ?? ??−1
(? ′).
?
? (? ′ ))
??−1
= ?? (?2 + ??−1
(? ′ )).

?
? (? ′ ))
So?? (?1 + ??−1
= ?? (?1 + ??−1
(? ′ ))

Therefore,

from

? (? ′ )]
? (? ′ )],
gives?∗ [?1 + ??−1
= ?∗ [?1 + ??−1

© 2015 The author and GRDS Publishing. All rights reserved.
Available Online at: http://grdspublishing.org/MATTER/matter.html

the

and?? (?2 +

above,?∗ [(?1 , ?1 )] = ?∗ [(?2 , ?2 )]

? (? ′ ))]
i.e.,[?? (?1 + ??−1
= [?? (?2 +

57

MATTER: International Journal of Science and Technology
ISSN 2454-5880
?
?
?
? (? ′ ))];this
??−1
gives [?? (?1 + ??−1
(? ′ ))] = [?? (?2 + ??−1
(? ′ ))], i.e., ?∗ [?1 + ??−1
(? ′ )] =
?
?
?
?∗ [?2 + ??−1
(? ′ )]. Since ?∗ is an isomorphism we have [?1 + ??−1
(? ′ )] = [?2 + ??−1
(? ′ )].

Hence

we

?
? (? ′ )], [?

have([?1 + ??−1
1 + ??−1 (? )])=

?
??−1
(? ′ )]);we

? (? ′ )], [?
([?2 + ??−1
2+

apply

the

isomorphism?∗ ∶ (?? (?̅)⁄?? (?̅)) × (?? (?̅ )⁄?? (?̅ )) → (?? (?̅) × ?? (?̅ ))⁄(?? (?̅) × ?? (?̅ ))to
the above

?
? (? ′ )], [?

to get?∗ ([?1 + ??−1
1 + ??−1 (? )])

=

? (? ′ )], [?
?∗ ([?2 + ??−1
2+

?
?
?
? (? ′ ),
? (? ′ ),
??−1
(? ′ )]), i.e.,[(?1 + ??−1
?1 + ??−1
(? ′ ))] = [(?2 + ??−1
?2 + ??−1
(? ′ ))]. Thus

[(?1 , ?1 )] = [(?2 , ?2 )], showing that ?∗ ∶ ?∗ (?) → ?∗ (?)is a monomorphism.
Next we show that ?∗ ∶ ?∗ (?) → ?∗ (?) is anepimorphism.Let[?] ∈ ?∗ (?)
arbitrary. Then ?? (?) ∈ ?? . Since ? is an epimorphism

be

?? (?) = ?? (?) for some ? ∈ ?? .

Hence (?, ?) ∈ ?? . Then?∗ [(?, ?)] = [?? (?, ?)] = [?]showing ?∗ is an epimorphism. Since ?
is an epimorphism and ?∗ is an isomorphism we conclude that? ∈ ?.
Next for any d.g.a. ? = Σ ?? and d.g.a.-homomorphisms? = {?? ∶ ?? → ?? }and? =
?≥0

{?? ∶ ?? → ?? }in???, let the following diagram
?

?

?

?↓

↓?

?

?

?

Figure 10
commute, i.e., ?? = ??. Consider the diagram
?
↘?
↘ℎ
?

?

?↘ ?↓
?

?
↓?


?

?

Figure 11
Define ℎ = {ℎ? ∶ ?? → ?? }by the ruleℎ(?) = (?(?), ?(?))for ? ∈ ?. Clearly ℎ is
well defined and is a d.g.a. homomorhism. Now for any ? ∈ ?,?ℎ(?) = ?(?(?), ?(?)) =
© 2015 The author and GRDS Publishing. All rights reserved.
Available Online at: http://grdspublishing.org/MATTER/matter.html

58

MATTER: International Journal of Science and Technology
ISSN 2454-5880

?(?)and?ℎ(?) = ?(?(?), ?(?)) = ?(?), i.e.,?ℎ = ?and?ℎ = ?. This completes the proof of
Proposition 3.2.∎

3.3 Proposition.
If each?? ∶ ?? → ?? ,? ∈ ?,is an element of?, where the index set?is an element of?,
then ∏?∈? ?? ∶ ∏?∈? ?? → ∏?∈? ?? is an element of?.
Proof.The proof is trivial.

The following result can be obtained from the above discussion.

3.4 Proposition. The category???is complete.

From Propositions 3.1- 3.4, it follows that the conditions of Theorem 2.10 are fulfilled
and by the use of Theorem 2.13, we obtain the following result.

3.5 Theorem.
Every object?of the category ??? has an Adams cocompletion ?? with respect to the
set of morphisms ? and there exists a morphism? ∶ ?? → ?in ? which is couniversal with
respect to the morphisms in?, that is, given a morphism? ∶ ? → ?in? there exists a unique
morphismt ∶ AS → Bsuch that st = e. In other words the following diagram is commutative:
??
?↓

?

?

↗?

?
Figure 12

3.

Minimal model
We recall the following algebraic preliminaries.

© 2015 The author and GRDS Publishing. All rights reserved.
Available Online at: http://grdspublishing.org/MATTER/matter.html

59

MATTER: International Journal of Science and Technology
ISSN 2454-5880

4.1 Definition.Deschner, 1975, Wu, 1980
A d.g.a. ? is called a minimal algebra if it satisfies the following properties:

?is free as a graded algebra.

?has decomposable differentials.

?0 = ℚ,

?has homology of finite type, i.e., for each?, ?? (?) is a finite dimensionalvector

?1 = 0.

space.
Let ℳ be the full subcategory of the category ??? consisting of all minimal algebras
and all d.g.a.-maps between them.

4.2 Definition. Deschner, 1975, Wu, 1980
Let?be a simply connected d.g.a..A d.g.a.? = ?? is called a minimal model of ? if the
following conditions hold:
(i)

?? ∈ ℳ.

(ii) Thereis a d.g.a.-map? ∶ ?? → ?which induces an isomorphism on homology,

i.e.,?∗ ∶ ?∗ (?? ) → ?∗ (?).
Henceforth we assume that the d.g.a.-map? ∶ ?? → ?is a d.g.a.-epimorphism.
4.3 Theorem.Deschner, 1975, Wu, 1980
LetAbe a simply connected d.g.a. andMA be its minimal model. The mapρ ∶ MA →
Ahas couniversal property, i.e., for any d.g.a. Zand d.g.a.-mapφ ∶ Z → A,there exists a d.g.a.map θ ∶ MA → Zsuch that ρ ≃ φθ; furthermore if the d.g.a.-map

φ ∶ Z → Ais an

epimorphism thenρ = φθ, i.e., the following diagram is commutative:
??
?↓

?

?

↗?

?
Figure 13
© 2015 The author and GRDS Publishing. All rights reserved.
Available Online at: http://grdspublishing.org/MATTER/matter.html

60

MATTER: International Journal of Science and Technology
ISSN 2454-5880

5. The result
We show that under a reasonable assumption,the minimal model of a 1-connected d.g.a.
can be expressed as the Adams cocompletion of the d.g.a. with respect to the chosen set of d.g.a.maps.
5.1 Theorem. ?? ≅ ?? .
Proof.Let ? ∶ ?? → ?be the map as in Theorem 3.5 and? ∶ ?? → ?be the d.g.a.-map as in
Theorem 4.3. Since the d.g.a.-map ? ∶ ?? → ? is a d.g.a.-epimorphism, by the couniversal
property of ? there exists a d.g.a.-map ? ∶ ?? → ?? such that ? = ??.

??

?

?↓

?

↗?

??
Figure 14
By the couniversal property of ?there exists a d.g.a.-map? ∶ ?? → ?? such that?? = ?.

??
?↓

?

?
↗?

??
Figure 15
Consider the diagram

© 2015 The author and GRDS Publishing. All rights reserved.
Available Online at: http://grdspublishing.org/MATTER/matter.html

61

MATTER: International Journal of Science and Technology
ISSN 2454-5880

??

?

?

?↓
1?? ↓

??

↗?

?↓
??
Figure 16
Thus we have??? = ?? = ? .By the uniqueness condition of the couniversal property
of ? (Theorem 3.5), we conclude that?? = 1?? .Next consider the diagram

??

?

?

?↓
1?? ↓

??

↗?

?↓
??
Figure 17
Thus we have??? = ?? = ?. By the couniversal oroperty of ? (Theorem 4.3), we
conclude that?? = 1?? .Thus?? ≅ ?? . This completes the proof of Theorem 5.1.

REFERENCES
Adams, J. F. (1973). Idempotent Functors in Homotopy Theory: Manifolds, Conf.
Adams J. F. (1975).Localization and Completion, Lecture Notes in Mathematics.Univ. of
Chicago.
Deleanu A., Frei A. & Hilton P. J. (1974). Generalized Adams completion.Cahiers de Top.et
Geom. Diff., 15, 61-82.
© 2015 The author and GRDS Publishing. All rights reserved.
Available Online at: http://grdspublishing.org/MATTER/matter.html

62

MATTER: International Journal of Science and Technology
ISSN 2454-5880

Deleanu A. (1975). Existence of the Adams completion for objects of cocomplete categories. J.
Pure and Appl. Alg., 6, 31-39.
Deschner A. J. (1976). Sullivan’s Theory of Minimal Models, Thesis.Univ. of British Columbia.
Gabriel P. &Zisman M. (1967).Calculus of Fractions and Homotopy Theory.SpringerVerlag, New York.
Halperin S. (1977, 1981). Lectures on Minimal Models.Publ. U. E. R. de Math?́ matiques, Univ.
de Lille I.
Lane S. Mac (1971). Categories for the working Mathematicians.Springer-Verlag, New York.
Nanda S. (1980). A note on the universe of a category of fractions.Canad.Math. Bull., 23(4),
425-427.
Schubert H. (1972). Categories. Springer Verlag, New York.
Wu wen-tsun (1980).Rational Homotopy Type.LNM 1264, Springer-Verlag.

© 2015 The author and GRDS Publishing. All rights reserved.
Available Online at: http://grdspublishing.org/MATTER/matter.html

63