Homotopy hypothesis

In category theory, a branch of mathematics, Grothendieck's homotopy hypothesis states, homotopy theory speaking, that the ∞-groupoids are spaces.

One version of the hypothesis was claimed to be proved in the 1991 paper by Kapranov and Voevodsky.^[1][2] Their proof turned out to be flawed and their result in the form interpreted by Carlos Simpson^[2] is now known as the Simpson conjecture.^[3]

In higher category theory, one considers a space-valued presheaf instead of a set-valued presheaf in ordinary category theory. In view of homotopy hypothesis, a space here can be taken to an ∞-groupoid.

A precise formulation of the hypothesis very strongly depends on the definition of an ∞-groupoid. One definition is that, mimicking the ordinary category case, an ∞-groupoid is an ∞-category in which each morphism is invertible or equivalently its homotopy category is a groupoid.

Now, if an ∞-category is defined as a simplicial set satisfying the weak Kan condition, as done commonly today, then ∞-groupoids amounts exactly to Kan complexes (= simplicial sets with the Kan condition) by the following argument. If ${\displaystyle X}$ is a Kan complex (viewed as an ∞-category) and ${\displaystyle f}$ a morphism in it, consider ${\displaystyle \sigma :\Lambda _{0}^{2}\to X}$ from the horn such that ${\displaystyle \sigma (0\to 1)=f,\,\sigma (0\to 2)=\operatorname {id} }$. By the Kan condition, ${\displaystyle \sigma }$ extends to ${\displaystyle {\overline {\sigma }}:\Delta ^{2}\to X}$ and the image ${\displaystyle g={\overline {\sigma }}(1\to 2)}$ is a left inverse of ${\displaystyle f}$. Similarly, ${\displaystyle f}$ has a right inverse and so is invertible. The converse, that an ∞-groupoid is a Kan complex, is less trivial and is due to Joyal (see Joyal's theorem).^[4][5][6]

Because of the above fact, it is common to define ∞-groupoids simply as Kan complexes. Now, a theorem of Milnor and CW approximation say that Kan complexes completely determine the homotopy theory of (reasonable) topological spaces. So, this essentially proves the hypothesis. In particular, if ∞-groupoids are defined as Kan complexes (bypassing Joyal’s result), then the hypothesis is almost trivial.

However, if an ∞-groupoid is defined in different ways, then the hypothesis is usually still open. In particular, the hypothesis with Grothendieck's original definition of an ∞-groupoid is still open.

There is also a version of homotopy hypothesis for (weak) n-groupoids, which roughly says^[7][8]

The statement requires several clarifications:

• An n-groupoid is typically defined as an n-category where each morphism is invertible. So, in particular, the meaning depends on the meaning of an n-category (e.g., usually some weak version of an n-category),
• "the same as" usually means some equivalence (see below), and the definition of an equivalence typically uses some higher notions like an ∞-category,
• A homotopy n-type means a reasonable topological space with vanishing i-th homotopy groups, i > n at each base point (so a homotopy n-type here is really a weak homotopy n-type to be precise).

Moreover, the equivalence between the two notions is supposed to be given on one direction by a higher version of a fundamental groupoid, or the fundamental n-groupoid ${\displaystyle \Pi _{n}(X)}$ of a space X where^[9][10]

• an object is a point in X,
• a 1-morphism ${\displaystyle f:x\to y}$ is a path from a point x to a point y, with the compositions the concatenation of two paths,
• a 2-morphism is a homotopy from a path ${\displaystyle f:x\to y}$ to a path ${\displaystyle g:x\to y}$,
• a 3-morphism is a "map" between homotopies,
• and so on until n-morphisms.

The other direction is given by geometric realization.

This version is still open.^{[citation needed]}

See also: Eilenberg–MacLane space, crossed module.

• Algebraic homotopy
• N-group (category theory)
• Pursuing Stacks
• Quasi-category
• Stratified space

• Baez, John C.; Dolan, James (1995). "Higher-dimensional algebra and topological quantum field theory". Journal of Mathematical Physics. 36 (11): 6073–6105. arXiv:q-alg/9503002. Bibcode:1995JMP....36.6073B. doi:10.1063/1.531236.
• Baez, John C. (1997). "An introduction to n-categories". Category Theory and Computer Science. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 1290. pp. 1–33. arXiv:q-alg/9705009. doi:10.1007/BFb0026978. ISBN 978-3-540-63455-3.
• Baez, John C.; Dolan, James (1998). "Categorification". arXiv:math/9802029.
• Baez, John C. (2007). "The Homotopy Hypothesis" (PDF).
• Baez, John C.; Shulman, Michael (2010). "Lectures on N-Categories and Cohomology". Towards Higher Categories. The IMA Volumes in Mathematics and its Applications. Vol. 152. pp. 1–68. arXiv:math/0608420. doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1524-5_1. ISBN 978-1-4419-1523-8. MR 2664619.
• Grothendieck, Alexander (2021). "Pursuing Stacks". arXiv:2111.01000 [math.CT].
• Gurski, Nick; Johnson, Niles; Osorno, Angelica M. (2019a). "Topological Invariants from Higher Categories". Notices of the American Mathematical Society. 66 (8): 1. doi:10.1090/NOTI1934.
• Gurski, Nick; Johnson, Niles; Osorno, Angélica M. (2019b). "The 2-dimensional stable homotopy hypothesis". Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra. 223 (10): 4348–4383. arXiv:1712.07218. doi:10.1016/j.jpaa.2019.01.012.
• Haugseng, Rune (2025). "Higher Category Theory". Encyclopedia of Mathematical Physics. pp. 1–23. arXiv:2401.14311. doi:10.1016/B978-0-323-95703-8.00206-8. ISBN 978-0-323-95706-9.
• Joyal, A. (2002). "Quasi-categories and Kan complexes". Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra. 175 (1–3): 207–222. doi:10.1016/S0022-4049(02)00135-4.
• Lurie, Jacob (2009). Higher Topos Theory (AM-170). Princeton University Press. ISBN 9780691140490. JSTOR j.ctt7s47v.
• Land, Markus (2021). "Joyal's Theorem, Applications, and Dwyer–Kan Localizations". Introduction to Infinity-Categories. Compact Textbooks in Mathematics. pp. 97–161. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-61524-6_2. ISBN 978-3-030-61523-9. Zbl 1471.18001.
• Maltsiniotis, Georges (2010). "Grothendieck ${\displaystyle \infty }$-groupoids, and still another definition of ${\displaystyle \infty }$-categories, §2.8. Grothendieck's conjecture (precise form)". arXiv:1009.2331 [math.CT].
• Nikolaus, Thomas (2011). "Algebraic models for higher categories". Indagationes Mathematicae. 21 (1–2): 52–75. arXiv:1003.1342. doi:10.1016/j.indag.2010.12.004.
• Riehl, Emily (2023). "Could ∞-Category Theory be Taught to Undergraduates?". Notices of the American Mathematical Society. 70 (5): 1. doi:10.1090/noti2692.
• Tamsamani, Zouhair (1999). "Sur des notions de n-categorie et n-groupoide non strictes via des ensembles multi-simpliciaux (On the notions of a nonstrict n-category and n-groupoid via multisimplicial sets)". K-Theory (in French). 16: 51–99. arXiv:alg-geom/9512006. doi:10.1023/A:1007747915317.

• Ayala, David; Francis, John; Rozenblyum, Nick (2018). "A stratified homotopy hypothesis". Journal of the European Mathematical Society. 21 (4): 1071–1178. arXiv:1502.01713. doi:10.4171/JEMS/856.
• Haine, Peter J. (2018). "On the homotopy theory of stratified spaces". arXiv:1811.01119 [math.AT].

• Hadzihasanovic, Amar (2020). "Diagrammatic sets and rewriting in weak higher categories". arXiv:2007.14505 [math.CT].

• Henry, Simon (May 26, 2022). Grothendieck's homotopy hypothesis (PDF). Grothendieck, a Multifarious Giant: Mathematics, Logic and Philosoph.
• Rezk, Charles (2022). "Introduction to quasicategories" (PDF) – via ncatlab.org.
• homotopy hypothesis at the nLab
• "What is the mistake in the proof of the Homotopy hypothesis by Kapranov and Voevodsky?". MathOverflow.
• "Current status of Grothendieck's homotopy hypothesis and Whitehead's algebraic homotopy programme". MathOverflow.