Let $R\colon A\mathrel {\rightarrow \kern -9.5pt\mathrlap {|}\kern 6pt}B$ be a relation.
In this section we characterise (for now, some of) the $2$-categorical epimorphisms in $\boldsymbol {\mathsf{Rel}}$, following Chapter 13: Types of Morphisms in Bicategories, Section 13.2.
Let $R\colon A\mathrel {\rightarrow \kern -9.5pt\mathrlap {|}\kern 6pt}B$ be a relation.
Corepresentably Faithful Morphisms in $\boldsymbol {\mathsf{Rel}}$. Every morphism of $\boldsymbol {\mathsf{Rel}}$ is a corepresentably faithful morphism.
Corepresentably Full Morphisms in $\boldsymbol {\mathsf{Rel}}$. The following conditions are equivalent:
The morphism $R\colon A\mathrel {\rightarrow \kern -9.5pt\mathrlap {|}\kern 6pt}B$ is a corepresentably full morphism.
For each pair of relations $S,T\colon X\mathrel {\rightrightarrows \kern -9.5pt\mathrlap {|}\kern 6pt}A$, the following condition is satisfied:
The functor
is full.
For each $U,V\in \mathcal{P}\webleft (B\webright )$, if $R^{-1}\webleft (U\webright )\subset R^{-1}\webleft (V\webright )$, then $U\subset V$.
The functor
is full.
For each $U,V\in \mathcal{P}\webleft (B\webright )$, if $R_{-1}\webleft (U\webright )\subset R_{-1}\webleft (V\webright )$, then $U\subset V$.
Corepresentably Fully Faithful Morphisms in $\boldsymbol {\mathsf{Rel}}$. Every corepresentably full morphism of $\boldsymbol {\mathsf{Rel}}$ is a corepresentably fully faithful morphism.
is faithful, i.e. iff the morphism
is injective for each $S,T\in \operatorname {\mathrm{Obj}}\webleft (\mathbf{Rel}\webleft (B,X\webright )\webright )$. However, $\operatorname {\mathrm{Hom}}_{\mathbf{Rel}\webleft (B,X\webright )}\webleft (S,T\webright )$ is either empty or a singleton, in either case of which the map $R^{*}_{S,T}$ is necessarily injective.
Item 2a$\iff $Item 2b: This is simply a matter of unwinding definitions: The relation $R$ is a corepresentably full morphism in $\boldsymbol {\mathsf{Rel}}$ iff , for each $X\in \operatorname {\mathrm{Obj}}\webleft (\boldsymbol {\mathsf{Rel}}\webright )$, the functor
is full, i.e. iff the morphism
is surjective for each $S,T\in \operatorname {\mathrm{Obj}}\webleft (\mathbf{Rel}\webleft (B,X\webright )\webright )$, i.e. iff , whenever $S\mathbin {\diamond }R\subset T\mathbin {\diamond }R$, we also have $S\subset T$.
Item 2c$\iff $Item 2d: This is also simply a matter of unwinding definitions: The functor
is full iff , for each $U,V\in \mathcal{P}\webleft (A\webright )$, the morphism
is surjective, i.e. iff whenever $R^{-1}\webleft (U\webright )\subset R^{-1}\webleft (V\webright )$, we also necessarily have $U\subset V$.
Item 2e$\iff $Item 2f: This is once again simply a matter of unwinding definitions, and proceeds exactly in the same way as in the proof of the equivalence between Item 2c and Item 2d given above.
Item 2d$\implies $Item 2f: Suppose that the following condition is true:
We need to show that the condition
is also true. We proceed step by step:
Suppose we have $U,V\in \mathcal{P}\webleft (B\webright )$ with $R_{-1}\webleft (U\webright )\subset R_{-1}\webleft (V\webright )$.
By Chapter 9: Constructions With Relations, of
, we have
By Chapter 4: Constructions With Sets, Item 1 of Proposition 4.3.10.1.2 we have $R^{-1}\webleft (A\setminus V\webright )\subset R^{-1}\webleft (A\setminus U\webright )$.
By assumption, we then have $A\setminus V\subset A\setminus U$.
By Chapter 4: Constructions With Sets, Item 1 of Proposition 4.3.10.1.2 again, we have $U\subset V$.
Item 2f$\implies $Item 2d: Suppose that the following condition is true:
We need to show that the condition
is also true. We proceed step by step:
Suppose we have $U,V\in \mathcal{P}\webleft (B\webright )$ with $R^{-1}\webleft (U\webright )\subset R^{-1}\webleft (V\webright )$.
By Chapter 9: Constructions With Relations, of
, we have
By Chapter 4: Constructions With Sets, Item 1 of Proposition 4.3.10.1.2 we have $R_{-1}\webleft (A\setminus V\webright )\subset R_{-1}\webleft (A\setminus U\webright )$.
By assumption, we then have $A\setminus V\subset A\setminus U$.
By Chapter 4: Constructions With Sets, Item 1 of Proposition 4.3.10.1.2 again, we have $U\subset V$.
Item 2b$\implies $Item 2d: Consider the diagram
for each $x\in X$, implying $S\subset T$.
Item 2d$\implies $Item 2b: Let $U,V\in \mathcal{P}\webleft (B\webright )$ and consider the diagram
Now, if $R^{-1}\webleft (U\webright )\subset R^{-1}\webleft (V\webright )$, i.e. $U\mathbin {\diamond }R\subset V\mathbin {\diamond }R$, then $U\subset V$ by assumption.
Item 2 of Proposition 8.4.10.1.1 gives a characterisation of the corepresentably full morphisms in $\boldsymbol {\mathsf{Rel}}$.
Are there other nice characterisations of these?
This question also appears as [Emily, What are the 2-categorical mono/epimorphisms in the 2-category of relations?].