Math 2.0

Category theory; homological algebra Monoidal, enriched and higher categories Theorem

Mac Lane's coherence theorem

Builds on Monoidal categoryPentagon identityCommutative diagramMonoidal functorEquivalence of categories

Statement

Let (𝒞,⊗,I,α,λ,ρ)(\mathcal{C}, \otimes, I, \alpha, \lambda, \rho) be a monoidal category. Call a formal word any expression built from variables x1,x2,…x_1, x_2, \ldots and the unit II with the binary operation ⊗\otimes. Call a formal morphism between two words any composite of formal instances of α\alpha, λ\lambda, ρ\rho and their inverses, tensored on both sides with identities.

  1. Any two formal morphisms between the same two words are equal after every substitution of objects of 𝒞\mathcal{C} for the variables. In other words, every formal diagram built from α\alpha, λ\lambda and ρ\rho commutes.
  2. 𝒞\mathcal{C} is equivalent, by a strong monoidal functor that is an equivalence of categories, to a strict monoidal category.

Remarks

Proof idea for part 1: every word can be moved by a formal morphism to a normal form. For example, the normal form can put all brackets to the right and remove all copies of II. One shows that any two such moves to normal form are equal, using the pentagon identity and the triangle identity to compare the possible first steps. Then any formal morphism u→vu \to v equals the composite of the move u→u \to normal form and the inverse of the move v→v \to normal form. Equivalently, the free monoidal category on a set of variables is a preorder.

The word "formal" is necessary. A diagram of instances of α\alpha, λ\lambda, ρ\rho on actual objects may fail to commute. This can happen when the diagram only makes sense because two different words give equal objects, for example when A⊗B=CA \otimes B = C holds in 𝒞\mathcal{C}. Formal diagrams track each variable, so such accidental identifications are not allowed.

Going deeper

For a student

Coherence is what makes calculations in monoidal categories practical: it justifies string diagrams and the habit of pretending that the tensor product is strictly associative. It reduces infinitely many coherence conditions to the two axioms of the definition, the pentagon and the triangle. For braided monoidal categories the analogous statement says that formal diagrams commute when they have the same underlying braid; for symmetric ones, when they have the same underlying permutation.

Reading path

To understand this page from the ground up, read these 6 pages in order. The foundations come first.

Show the path as a graph
Each page uses the pages above it. The colour of the bar on a box shows how strong the evidence is, and the box also gives it as text. The list has the same pages.
  • no evidence level
  1. Commutative diagram concept
  2. Equivalence of categories concept
  3. Monoidal category concept
  4. Monoidal functor concept
  5. Pentagon identity statement
  6. Mac Lane's coherence theorem statement

Further reading

  1. Web https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coherency_(homotopy_theory)
About this page
Tag2W2X7EBG2S
URIm2://2W2X7EBG2S
Kindstatement, theorem
WritingW0 stub
MSC18M05, 18N20
StatusThis copy of the site has no build data. Run m2 status 2W2X7EBG2S.
AboutMonoidal category
UsesMonoidal category, Pentagon identity, Commutative diagram, Monoidal functor, Equivalence of categories
Changed2 November 2026

Markdown · JSON · Edit on GitHub

What this page needs for W1

  • an inventory row: the row of the inventory that the node accounts for (0 of 1)
  • a source with a locator (0 of 1)

The writing levels say how complete the text of a page is. They do not measure its truth.

What links here

No page links to this page yet.