The pullback of $A$ and $B$ over $C$ along $f$ and $g$1 is the pullback of $A$ and $B$ over $C$ along $f$ and $g$ in $\mathsf{Sets}$ as in ,
.
- 1Further Terminology: Also called the fibre product of $A$ and $B$ over $C$ along $f$ and $g$.
Let $A$, $B$, and $C$ be sets and let $f\colon A\to C$ and $g\colon B\to C$ be functions.
The pullback of $A$ and $B$ over $C$ along $f$ and $g$1 is the pullback of $A$ and $B$ over $C$ along $f$ and $g$ in $\mathsf{Sets}$ as in ,
.
Concretely, the pullback of $A$ and $B$ over $C$ along $f$ and $g$ is the pair $(A\times _{C}B,\left\{ \operatorname {\mathrm{\mathrm{pr}}}_{1},\operatorname {\mathrm{\mathrm{pr}}}_{2}\right\} )$ consisting of:
The Limit. The set $A\times _{C}B$ defined by
The Cone. The maps1
defined by
for each $(a,b)\in A\times _{C}B$.
We claim that $A\times _{C}B$ is the categorical pullback of $A$ and $B$ over $C$ with respect to $(f,g)$ in $\mathsf{Sets}$. First we need to check that the relevant pullback diagram commutes, i.e. that we have
where $f(a)=g(b)$ since $(a,b)\in A\times _{C}B$. Next, we prove that $A\times _{C}B$ satisfies the universal property of the pullback. Suppose we have a diagram of the form
via
for each $x\in P$, where we note that $(p_{1}(x),p_{2}(x))\in A\times B$ indeed lies in $A\times _{C}B$ by the condition
which gives
for each $x\in P$, so that $(p_{1}(x),p_{2}(x))\in A\times _{C}B$.
It is common practice to write $A\times _{C}B$ for the pullback of $A$ and $B$ over $C$ along $f$ and $g$, omitting the maps $f$ and $g$ from the notation and instead leaving them implicit, to be understood from the context.
However, the set $A\times _{C}B$ depends very much on the maps $f$ and $g$, and sometimes it is necessary or useful to note this dependence explicitly. In such situations, we will write $A\times _{f,C,g}B$ or $A\times ^{f,g}_{C}B$ for $A\times _{C}B$.
Here are some examples of pullbacks of sets.
Unions via Intersections. Let $X$ be a set. We have
This finishes the proof.
Let $A$, $B$, $C$, and $X$ be sets.
Functoriality. The assignment $(A,B,C,f,g)\mapsto A\times _{f,C,g}B$ defines a functor
where $\mathcal{P}$ is the category that looks like this:
for each $(a,b)\in A\times _{C}B$, which is the unique map making the diagram
Adjointness I. We have adjunctions
natural in $(A,\phi _{A}),(B,\phi _{B}),(C,\phi _{C})\in \operatorname {\mathrm{Obj}}(\mathsf{Sets}_{/X})$, where $\boldsymbol {\mathsf{Sets}}_{/X}(A,B)$ is the object of $\mathsf{Sets}_{/X}$ consisting of (see ,
):
The Set. The set $\boldsymbol {\mathsf{Sets}}_{/X}(A,B)$ defined by
The Map to $X$. The map
defined by
for each $(x,f)\in \boldsymbol {\mathsf{Sets}}_{/X}(A,B)$.
Adjointness II. We have an adjunction
natural in $A\in \operatorname {\mathrm{Obj}}(\mathsf{Sets}_{/X})$ and in $(B,C)\in \operatorname {\mathrm{Obj}}(\mathsf{Sets}_{/X}\times \mathsf{Sets}_{/X})$.
Associativity. Given a diagram
where these pullbacks are built as in the diagrams
Interaction With Composition. Given a diagram
where
and where these pullbacks are built as in the following diagrams:
Unitality. We have isomorphisms of sets
Commutativity. We have an isomorphism of sets
Distributivity Over Coproducts. Let $A$, $B$, and $C$ be sets and let $\phi _{A}\colon A\to X$, $\phi _{B}\colon B\to X$, and $\phi _{C}\colon C\to X$ be morphisms of sets. We have isomorphisms of sets
as in the diagrams
Annihilation With the Empty Set. We have isomorphisms of sets
Interaction With Products. We have an isomorphism of sets
Symmetric Monoidality. The 8-tuple $\left(\mathrlap {\phantom{\lambda ^{\mathsf{Sets}_{/X}}}}\mathsf{Sets}_{/X}\right.$, $\times _{X}$, $X$, $\boldsymbol {\mathsf{Sets}}_{/X}$, $\alpha ^{\mathsf{Sets}_{/X}}$, $\lambda ^{\mathsf{Sets}_{/X}}$, $\rho ^{\mathsf{Sets}_{/X}}$, $\left.\sigma ^{\mathsf{Sets}_{/X}}\right)$ is a symmetric closed monoidal category.
We have
we have
which are isomorphic to $A$ via the maps $(x,a)\mapsto a$ and $(a,x)\mapsto a$. The proof of the naturality of $\lambda ^{\mathsf{Sets}_{/X}}$ and $\rho ^{\mathsf{Sets}_{/X}}$ is omitted.
The proof of the naturality of $\sigma ^{\mathsf{Sets}_{/X}}$ is omitted.
being similar. The proof of the naturality of $\delta ^{\mathsf{Sets}_{/X}}_{\ell }$ and $\delta ^{\mathsf{Sets}_{/X}}_{r}$ is omitted.
and similarly for $\text{Ø}\times _{X}A$, where we have used Item 8 of Proposition 4.1.3.1.3. The proof of the naturality of $\zeta ^{\mathsf{Sets}_{/X}}_{\ell }$ and $\zeta ^{\mathsf{Sets}_{/X}}_{r}$ is omitted.