We have a natural identification
\[ \webleft\{ \begin{gathered} \text{Comonads in}\\ \text{$\textbf{Rel}$ on $A$} \end{gathered} \webright\} \cong \webleft\{ \text{Subsets of $A$}\webright\} . \]
Here's a breakdown of the differences between each PDF style:
Style | Class | Font | Theorem Environments |
---|---|---|---|
Style 1 | book |
Alegreya Sans | tcbthm |
Style 2 | book |
Alegreya Sans | amsthm |
Style 3 | book |
Arno* | amsthm |
Style 4 | book |
Computer Modern | amsthm |
*To be replaced with Linus Romer's Elemaints when it is released.
We have a natural identification
A comonad in $\textbf{Rel}$ on $A$ consists of a relation $R\colon A\mathrel {\rightarrow \kern -9.5pt\mathrlap {|}\kern 6pt}A$ together with maps
making the diagrams
commute. However, since all morphisms involved are inclusions, the commutativity of the above diagrams is automatic, and hence all that is left is the data of the two maps $\Delta _{R}$ and $\epsilon _{R}$, which correspond respectively to the following conditions: