Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

Dinatural transformations do not compose in general

Statement

There are a category C, functors P,Q,R:Cop×C→Set (Product category and its projection functors, Opposite category Cop, Sets and functions form the large locally small category Set) and dinatural transformations α:P→Q and β:Q→R (Dinatural transformation between functors on Cop×C) for which the componentwise composite (βc∘αc)c is not a dinatural transformation P→R.

Hence the dinatural transformations between functors on Cop×C are not the morphisms of a category with componentwise composition.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The walking arrow C, with objects 0 and 1 and one non-identity morphism u:0→1.

[F1]

A dinatural transformation α:P→Q is a family αc:P(c,c)→Q(c,c) such that every f:c→c′ satisfies Q(1c,f)∘αc∘P(f,1c)=Q(f,1c′)∘αc′∘P(1c′,f), the equation displayed by the hexagon (Dinatural transformation between functors on Cop×C).

[F2]

Sets as objects and functions as morphisms form a large locally small category Set (Sets and functions form the large locally small category Set).

[F3]

Composition in a category is associative and unital: h∘(g∘f)=(h∘g)∘f,1B∘f=f=f∘1A (Category, object, morphism, domain, codomain, identity, composition, and hom-collection).

[F4]

The product category has morphisms (f,g):(C,D)→(C′,D′), componentwise identities, and componentwise composition (f′,g′)∘(f,g)=(f′∘f,g′∘g) (Product category and its projection functors).

Proof

technique · constructive
1.1F2F3F4givenconstruct

Take C to be the walking arrow. Its product with the opposite has objects (0,0),(0,1),(1,0),(1,1), and a functor T:Cop×C→Set is exactly four sets T(0,0),T(0,1),T(1,0),T(1,1) together with four functions T(u,10):T(1,0)→T(0,0), T(11,u):T(1,0)→T(1,1), T(10,u):T(0,0)→T(0,1) and T(u,11):T(1,1)→T(0,1) subject to the single equation T(10,u)∘T(u,10)=T(u,11)∘T(11,u). Define P by taking all four sets to be a one-element set; define Q by Q(1,0)=∅ and Q(0,0),Q(1,1),Q(0,1) one-element sets; define R by R(1,0)=∅, R(0,0)={c}, R(1,1)={d}, R(0,1)={y1,y2} with y1≠y2, R(10,u)(c)=y1 and R(u,11)(d)=y2.

2.1F3F4step 1.1algebra

Each of P,Q,R satisfies the displayed functor equation, so each is a functor: for P both composites are functions between one-element sets; for Q and for R both composites are functions with domain the empty set ∅, and any two functions with empty domain and the same codomain are equal.

2.2F1step 1.1

The unique family α with α0:P(0,0)→Q(0,0) and α1:P(1,1)→Q(1,1) is dinatural: the only non-identity morphism of C is u, and the hexagon at u is an equation between two functions P(1,0)→Q(0,1) whose codomain Q(0,1) has one element.

2.3F1step 1.1

Every family β with β0:Q(0,0)→R(0,0) and β1:Q(1,1)→R(1,1) is dinatural: the hexagon at u is an equation between two functions whose domain is Q(1,0)=∅.

3.1F1step 1.1step 2.1step 2.2step 2.3discharge-construct∎

The componentwise composite γ, with γ0=β0α0 and γ1=β1α1, fails the hexagon at u: the left leg R(10,u)∘γ0∘P(u,10) sends the element of the one-element set P(1,0) to y1, the right leg R(u,11)∘γ1∘P(11,u) sends it to y2, and y1≠y2. So α and β are dinatural and their composite is not, which is the asserted witness.

Remarks

The two empty slots are the whole mechanism. Putting ∅ in the (1,0) position of Q and of R makes the functor equation of step 1.1 vacuous there and makes every family Q→R dinatural, so the second half of the composite is unconstrained; the one-element set in the (0,1) position of Q makes the first half unconstrained in the other direction. The composite then has to satisfy a hexagon whose codomain R(0,1) has two elements, and nothing has forced its two legs to agree.

A dinatural transformation may still be composed with a natural transformation on either side, and that composite is dinatural; this is Composing a dinatural transformation with a natural transformation on either side gives a dinatural transformation.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

12 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources