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 be a monoidal category. Call a formal word any expression built from variables and the unit with the binary operation . Call a formal morphism between two words any composite of formal instances of , , and their inverses, tensored on both sides with identities.
- Any two formal morphisms between the same two words are equal after every substitution of objects of for the variables. In other words, every formal diagram built from , and commutes.
- 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 . 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 equals the composite of the move normal form and the inverse of the move 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 , , 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 holds in . 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
- no evidence level
- Commutative diagram concept
- Equivalence of categories concept
- Monoidal category concept
- Monoidal functor concept
- Pentagon identity statement
- Mac Lane's coherence theorem statement
Further reading
About this page
| Tag | 2W2X7EBG2S |
|---|---|
| URI | m2://2W2X7EBG2S |
| Kind | statement, theorem |
| Writing | W0 stub |
| MSC | 18M05, 18N20 |
| Status | This copy of the site has no build data. Run m2 status 2W2X7EBG2S. |
| About | Monoidal category |
| Uses | Monoidal category, Pentagon identity, Commutative diagram, Monoidal functor, Equivalence of categories |
| Changed | 2 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.