passagemath-objects 10.6.44__cp314-cp314t-macosx_13_0_arm64.whl

sage/categories/category_with_axiom.py

@@ -0,0 +1,2876 @@
+# sage_setup: distribution = sagemath-objects
+# delvewheel: patch
+r"""
+Axioms
+
+This documentation covers how to implement axioms and proceeds with an
+overview of the implementation of the axiom infrastructure. It assumes
+that the reader is familiar with the :ref:`category primer
+<sage.categories.primer>`, and in particular its :ref:`section about
+axioms <category-primer-axioms>`.
+
+Implementing axioms
+===================
+
+Simple case involving a single predefined axiom
+-----------------------------------------------
+
+Suppose that one wants to provide code (and documentation, tests, ...)
+for the objects of some existing category ``Cs()`` that satisfy some
+predefined axiom ``A``.
+
+The first step is to open the hood and check whether there already
+exists a class implementing the category ``Cs().A()``. For example,
+taking ``Cs=Semigroups`` and the ``Finite`` axiom, there already
+exists a class for the category of finite semigroups::
+
+    sage: Semigroups().Finite()
+    Category of finite semigroups
+    sage: type(Semigroups().Finite())
+    <class 'sage.categories.finite_semigroups.FiniteSemigroups_with_category'>
+
+In this case, we say that the category of semigroups *implements* the
+axiom ``Finite``, and code about finite semigroups should go in the
+class :class:`FiniteSemigroups` (or, as usual, in its nested classes
+``ParentMethods``, ``ElementMethods``, and so on).
+
+On the other hand, there is no class for the category of infinite
+semigroups::
+
+    sage: Semigroups().Infinite()
+    Category of infinite semigroups
+    sage: type(Semigroups().Infinite())
+    <class 'sage.categories.category.JoinCategory_with_category'>
+
+This category is indeed just constructed as the intersection of the
+categories of semigroups and of infinite sets respectively::
+
+    sage: Semigroups().Infinite().super_categories()
+    [Category of semigroups, Category of infinite sets]
+
+In this case, one needs to create a new class to implement the axiom
+``Infinite`` for this category. This boils down to adding a nested
+class ``Semigroups.Infinite`` inheriting from :class:`CategoryWithAxiom`.
+
+In the following example, we implement a category ``Cs``, with a
+subcategory for the objects satisfying the ``Finite`` axiom defined in
+the super category ``Sets`` (we will see later on how to *define* new
+axioms)::
+
+    sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import CategoryWithAxiom
+    sage: class Cs(Category):
+    ....:     def super_categories(self):
+    ....:         return [Sets()]
+    ....:     class Finite(CategoryWithAxiom):
+    ....:         class ParentMethods:
+    ....:             def foo(self):
+    ....:                 print("I am a method on finite C's")
+
+::
+
+    sage: Cs().Finite()
+    Category of finite cs
+    sage: Cs().Finite().super_categories()
+    [Category of finite sets, Category of cs]
+    sage: Cs().Finite().all_super_categories()
+    [Category of finite cs, Category of finite sets,
+     Category of cs, Category of sets, ...]
+    sage: Cs().Finite().axioms()
+    frozenset({'Finite'})
+
+Now a parent declared in the category ``Cs().Finite()`` inherits from
+all the methods of finite sets and of finite `C`'s, as desired::
+
+    sage: P = Parent(category=Cs().Finite())
+    sage: P.is_finite()             # Provided by Sets.Finite.ParentMethods
+    True
+    sage: P.foo()                   # Provided by Cs.Finite.ParentMethods
+    I am a method on finite C's
+
+.. _category-with-axiom-design:
+
+.. NOTE::
+
+    - This follows the same idiom as for
+      :ref:`sage.categories.covariant_functorial_construction`.
+
+    - From an object oriented point of view, any subcategory ``Cs()``
+      of :class:`Sets` inherits a ``Finite`` method.  Usually ``Cs``
+      could complement this method by overriding it with a method
+      ``Cs.Finite`` which would make a super call to ``Sets.Finite``
+      and then do extra stuff.
+
+      In the above example, ``Cs`` also wants to complement
+      ``Sets.Finite``, though not by doing more stuff, but by
+      providing it with an additional mixin class containing the code
+      for finite ``Cs``. To keep the analogy, this mixin class is to
+      be put in ``Cs.Finite``.
+
+    - By defining the axiom ``Finite``, :class:`Sets` fixes the
+      semantic of ``Cs.Finite()`` for all its subcategories ``Cs``:
+      namely "the category of ``Cs`` which are finite as sets". Hence,
+      for example, ``Modules.Free.Finite`` cannot be used to model the
+      category of free modules of finite rank, even though their
+      traditional name "finite free modules" might suggest it.
+
+    - It may come as a surprise that we can actually use the same name
+      ``Finite`` for the mixin class and for the method defining the
+      axiom; indeed, by default a class does not have a binding
+      behavior and would completely override the method. See the
+      section :ref:`axioms-defining-a-new-axiom` for details and the
+      rationale behind it.
+
+      An alternative would have been to give another name to the mixin
+      class, like ``FiniteCategory``. However this would have resulted
+      in more namespace pollution, whereas using ``Finite`` is already
+      clear, explicit, and easier to remember.
+
+    - Under the hood, the category ``Cs().Finite()`` is aware that it
+      has been constructed from the category ``Cs()`` by adding the
+      axiom ``Finite``::
+
+        sage: Cs().Finite().base_category()
+        Category of cs
+        sage: Cs().Finite()._axiom
+        'Finite'
+
+Over time, the nested class ``Cs.Finite`` may become large and too
+cumbersome to keep as a nested subclass of ``Cs``. Or the category with
+axiom may have a name of its own in the literature, like *semigroups*
+rather than *associative magmas*, or *fields* rather than *commutative
+division rings*. In this case, the category with axiom can be put
+elsewhere, typically in a separate file, with just a link from
+``Cs``::
+
+    sage: class Cs(Category):
+    ....:     def super_categories(self):
+    ....:         return [Sets()]
+    sage: class FiniteCs(CategoryWithAxiom):
+    ....:     class ParentMethods:
+    ....:         def foo(self):
+    ....:             print("I am a method on finite C's")
+    sage: Cs.Finite = FiniteCs
+    sage: Cs().Finite()
+    Category of finite cs
+
+For a real example, see the code of the class :class:`FiniteGroups` and the
+link to it in :class:`Groups`. Note that the link is implemented using
+:class:`~sage.misc.lazy_import.LazyImport`; this is highly recommended: it
+makes sure that :class:`FiniteGroups` is imported after :class:`Groups` it
+depends upon, and makes it explicit that the class :class:`Groups` can be
+imported and is fully functional without importing :class:`FiniteGroups`.
+
+.. NOTE::
+
+    Some categories with axioms are created upon Sage's startup. In such a
+    case, one needs to pass the ``at_startup=True`` option to
+    :class:`~sage.misc.lazy_import.LazyImport`, in order to quiet the warning
+    about that lazy import being resolved upon startup. See for example
+    ``Sets.Finite``.
+
+    This is undoubtedly a code smell. Nevertheless, it is preferable
+    to stick to lazy imports, first to resolve the import order
+    properly, and more importantly as a reminder that the category
+    would be best not constructed upon Sage's startup. This is to spur
+    developers to reduce the number of parents (and therefore
+    categories) that are constructed upon startup. Each
+    ``at_startup=True`` that will be removed will be a measure of
+    progress in this direction.
+
+.. NOTE::
+
+    In principle, due to a limitation of
+    :class:`~sage.misc.lazy_import.LazyImport` with nested classes (see
+    :issue:`15648`), one should pass the option ``as_name`` to
+    :class:`~sage.misc.lazy_import.LazyImport`::
+
+        Finite = LazyImport('sage.categories.finite_groups', 'FiniteGroups',
+                            as_name='Finite')
+
+    in order to prevent ``Groups.Finite`` to keep on reimporting
+    ``FiniteGroups``.
+
+    Given that passing this option introduces some redundancy and is
+    error prone, the axiom infrastructure includes a little workaround
+    which makes the ``as_name`` unnecessary in this case.
+
+Making the category with axiom directly callable
+^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+
+If desired, a category with axiom can be constructed directly through
+its class rather than through its base category::
+
+    sage: Semigroups()
+    Category of semigroups
+    sage: Semigroups() is Magmas().Associative()
+    True
+
+    sage: FiniteGroups()
+    Category of finite groups
+    sage: FiniteGroups() is Groups().Finite()
+    True
+
+For this notation to work, the class :class:`Semigroups` needs to be
+aware of the base category class (here, :class:`Magmas`) and of the
+axiom (here, ``Associative``)::
+
+    sage: Semigroups._base_category_class_and_axiom
+    (<class 'sage.categories.magmas.Magmas'>, 'Associative')
+    sage: Fields._base_category_class_and_axiom
+    (<class 'sage.categories.division_rings.DivisionRings'>, 'Commutative')
+    sage: FiniteGroups._base_category_class_and_axiom
+    (<class 'sage.categories.groups.Groups'>, 'Finite')
+    sage: FiniteDimensionalAlgebrasWithBasis._base_category_class_and_axiom
+    (<class 'sage.categories.algebras_with_basis.AlgebrasWithBasis'>, 'FiniteDimensional')
+
+In our example, the attribute ``_base_category_class_and_axiom`` was
+set upon calling ``Cs().Finite()``, which makes the notation seemingly
+work::
+
+    sage: FiniteCs()
+    Category of finite cs
+    sage: FiniteCs._base_category_class_and_axiom
+    (<class '__main__.Cs'>, 'Finite')
+    sage: FiniteCs._base_category_class_and_axiom_origin
+    'set by __classget__'
+
+But calling ``FiniteCs()`` right after defining the class would have
+failed (try it!). In general, one needs to set the attribute explicitly::
+
+    sage: class FiniteCs(CategoryWithAxiom):
+    ....:     _base_category_class_and_axiom = (Cs, 'Finite')
+    ....:     class ParentMethods:
+    ....:         def foo(self):
+    ....:             print("I am a method on finite C's")
+
+Having to set explicitly this link back from ``FiniteCs`` to ``Cs``
+introduces redundancy in the code. It would therefore be desirable to
+have the infrastructure set the link automatically instead (a
+difficulty is to achieve this while supporting lazy imported
+categories with axiom).
+
+As a first step, the link is set automatically upon accessing the
+class from the base category class::
+
+    sage: Algebras.WithBasis._base_category_class_and_axiom
+    (<class 'sage.categories.algebras.Algebras'>, 'WithBasis')
+    sage: Algebras.WithBasis._base_category_class_and_axiom_origin
+    'set by __classget__'
+
+Hence, for whatever this notation is worth, one can currently do::
+
+    sage: Algebras.WithBasis(QQ)
+    Category of algebras with basis over Rational Field
+
+We don't recommend using syntax like ``Algebras.WithBasis(QQ)``, as it
+may eventually be deprecated.
+
+As a second step, Sage tries some obvious heuristics to deduce the link
+from the name of the category with axiom (see
+:func:`base_category_class_and_axiom` for the details). This typically
+covers the following examples::
+
+    sage: FiniteCoxeterGroups()
+    Category of finite Coxeter groups
+    sage: FiniteCoxeterGroups() is CoxeterGroups().Finite()
+    True
+    sage: FiniteCoxeterGroups._base_category_class_and_axiom_origin
+    'deduced by base_category_class_and_axiom'
+
+    sage: FiniteDimensionalAlgebrasWithBasis(QQ)
+    Category of finite dimensional algebras with basis over Rational Field
+    sage: FiniteDimensionalAlgebrasWithBasis(QQ) is Algebras(QQ).FiniteDimensional().WithBasis()
+    True
+
+If the heuristic succeeds, the result is guaranteed to be correct. If
+it fails, typically because the category has a name of its own like
+:class:`Fields`, the attribute ``_base_category_class_and_axiom``
+should be set explicitly. For more examples, see the code of the
+classes :class:`Semigroups` or :class:`Fields`.
+
+.. NOTE::
+
+    When printing out a category with axiom, the heuristic determines
+    whether a category has a name of its own by checking out how
+    ``_base_category_class_and_axiom`` was set::
+
+        sage: Fields._base_category_class_and_axiom_origin
+        'hardcoded'
+
+    See :meth:`CategoryWithAxiom._without_axioms`,
+    :meth:`CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static`.
+
+In our running example ``FiniteCs``, Sage failed to deduce
+automatically the base category class and axiom because the class
+``Cs`` is not in the standard location ``sage.categories.cs``.
+
+.. TOPIC:: Design discussion
+
+    The above deduction, based on names, is undoubtedly inelegant. But
+    it's safe (either the result is guaranteed to be correct, or an
+    error is raised), it saves on some redundant information, and it
+    is only used for the simple shorthands like ``FiniteGroups()`` for
+    ``Groups().Finite()``. Finally, most if not all of these
+    shorthands are likely to eventually disappear (see :issue:`15741`
+    and the :ref:`related discussion in the primer
+    <category-primer-axioms-single-entry-point>`).
+
+.. _axioms-defining-a-new-axiom:
+
+Defining a new axiom
+--------------------
+
+We describe now how to define a new axiom. The first step is to figure
+out the largest category where the axiom makes sense. For example
+``Sets`` for ``Finite``, ``Magmas`` for ``Associative``, or
+``Modules`` for ``FiniteDimensional``. Here we define the axiom
+``Green`` for the category ``Cs`` and its subcategories::
+
+    sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import CategoryWithAxiom
+    sage: class Cs(Category):
+    ....:     def super_categories(self):
+    ....:         return [Sets()]
+    ....:     class SubcategoryMethods:
+    ....:         def Green(self):
+    ....:             '<documentation of the axiom Green>'
+    ....:             return self._with_axiom("Green")
+    ....:     class Green(CategoryWithAxiom):
+    ....:         class ParentMethods:
+    ....:             def foo(self):
+    ....:                 print("I am a method on green C's")
+
+With the current implementation, the name of the axiom must also be
+added to a global container::
+
+    sage: all_axioms = sage.categories.category_with_axiom.all_axioms
+    sage: all_axioms += ("Green",)
+
+We can now use the axiom as usual::
+
+    sage: Cs().Green()
+    Category of green cs
+
+    sage: P = Parent(category=Cs().Green())
+    sage: P.foo()
+    I am a method on green C's
+
+Compared with our first example, the only newcomer is the method
+``.Green()`` that can be used by any subcategory ``Ds()`` of ``Cs()``
+to add the axiom ``Green``. Note that the expression ``Ds().Green``
+always evaluates to this method, regardless of whether ``Ds`` has a
+nested class ``Ds.Green`` or not (an implementation detail)::
+
+    sage: Cs().Green
+    <bound method Cs.SubcategoryMethods.Green of Category of cs>
+
+Thanks to this feature (implemented in :meth:`CategoryWithAxiom.__classget__`),
+the user is systematically referred to the documentation of this
+method when doing introspection on ``Ds().Green``::
+
+    sage: C = Cs()
+    sage: C.Green?             # not tested
+    sage: Cs().Green.__doc__
+    '<documentation of the axiom Green>'
+
+It is therefore the natural spot for the documentation of the axiom.
+
+.. NOTE::
+
+    The presence of the nested class ``Green`` in ``Cs`` is currently
+    mandatory even if it is empty.
+
+.. TODO::
+
+    Specify whether or not one should systematically use
+    @cached_method in the definition of the axiom. And make sure all
+    the definition of axioms in Sage are consistent in this respect!
+
+.. TODO::
+
+    We could possibly define an @axiom decorator? This could hide two
+    little implementation details: whether or not to make the method a
+    cached method, and the call to _with_axiom(...) under the hood. It
+    could do possibly do some more magic. The gain is not obvious though.
+
+.. NOTE::
+
+    ``all_axioms`` is only used marginally, for sanity checks and when
+    trying to derive automatically the base category class. The order
+    of the axioms in this tuple also controls the order in which they
+    appear when printing out categories with axioms (see
+    :meth:`CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static`).
+
+    During a Sage session, new axioms should only be added at the *end*
+    of ``all_axioms``, as above, so as to not break the cache of
+    :func:`axioms_rank`. Otherwise, they can be inserted statically
+    anywhere in the tuple. For axioms defined within the Sage library,
+    the name is best inserted by editing directly the definition of
+    ``all_axioms`` in :mod:`sage.categories.category_with_axiom`.
+
+.. TOPIC:: Design note
+
+    Let us state again that, unlike what the existence of
+    ``all_axioms`` might suggest, the definition of an axiom is local
+    to a category and its subcategories. In particular, two
+    independent categories ``Cs()`` and ``Ds()`` can very well define
+    axioms with the same name and different semantics. As long as the
+    two hierarchies of subcategories don't intersect, this is not a
+    problem. And if they do intersect naturally (that is if one is
+    likely to create a parent belonging to both categories), this
+    probably means that the categories ``Cs`` and ``Ds`` are about
+    related enough areas of mathematics that one should clear the
+    ambiguity by having either the same semantic or different names.
+
+    This caveat is no different from that of name clashes in hierarchy
+    of classes involving multiple inheritance.
+
+.. TODO::
+
+    Explore ways to get rid of this global ``all_axioms`` tuple,
+    and/or have automatic registration there, and/or having a
+    register_axiom(...) method.
+
+Special case: defining an axiom depending on several categories
+^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+
+In some cases, the largest category where the axiom makes sense is the
+intersection of two categories. This is typically the case for axioms
+specifying compatibility conditions between two otherwise unrelated
+operations, like ``Distributive`` which specifies a compatibility
+between `*` and `+`. Ideally, we would want the ``Distributive`` axiom
+to be defined by::
+
+    sage: Magmas() & AdditiveMagmas()
+    Join of Category of magmas and Category of additive magmas
+
+The current infrastructure does not support this perfectly: indeed,
+defining an axiom for a category `C` requires `C` to have a class of
+its own; hence a :class:`~.category.JoinCategory` as above won't do;
+we need to implement a new class like
+:class:`~.magmas_and_additive_magmas.MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas`;
+furthermore, we cannot yet model the fact that ``MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas()``
+*is* the intersection of ``Magmas()`` and ``AdditiveMagmas()`` rather than a
+mere subcategory::
+
+    sage: from sage.categories.magmas_and_additive_magmas import MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas
+    sage: Magmas() & AdditiveMagmas() is MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas()
+    False
+    sage: Magmas() & AdditiveMagmas()             # todo: not implemented
+    Category of magmas and additive magmas
+
+Still, there is a workaround to get the natural notations::
+
+    sage: (Magmas() & AdditiveMagmas()).Distributive()
+    Category of distributive magmas and additive magmas
+    sage: (Monoids() & CommutativeAdditiveGroups()).Distributive()
+    Category of rings
+
+The trick is to define ``Distributive`` as usual in
+:class:`~.magmas_and_additive_magmas.MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas`, and to
+add a method :meth:`Magmas.SubcategoryMethods.Distributive` which
+checks that ``self`` is a subcategory of both ``Magmas()`` and
+``AdditiveMagmas()``, complains if not, and otherwise takes the
+intersection of ``self`` with ``MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas()`` before
+calling ``Distributive``.
+
+The downsides of this workaround are:
+
+- Creation of an otherwise empty class
+  :class:`~.magmas_and_additive_magmas.MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas`.
+
+- Pollution of the namespace of ``Magmas()`` (and subcategories like
+  ``Groups()``) with a method that is irrelevant (but safely complains
+  if called).
+
+- ``C._with_axiom('Distributive')`` is not strictly equivalent to
+  ``C.Distributive()``, which can be unpleasantly surprising::
+
+    sage: (Monoids() & CommutativeAdditiveGroups()).Distributive()
+    Category of rings
+
+    sage: (Monoids() & CommutativeAdditiveGroups())._with_axiom('Distributive')
+    Join of Category of monoids and Category of commutative additive groups
+
+.. TODO::
+
+    Other categories that would be better implemented via an axiom
+    depending on a join category include:
+
+    - :class:`Algebras`: defining an associative unital algebra as a
+      ring and a module satisfying the suitable compatibility axiom
+      between inner multiplication and multiplication by scalars
+      (bilinearity). Of course this should be implemented at the level
+      of :class:`~.magmatic_algebras.MagmaticAlgebras`, if not higher.
+
+    - :class:`Bialgebras`: defining a bialgebra as an algebra and
+      coalgebra where the coproduct is a morphism for the product.
+
+    - :class:`Bimodules`: defining a bimodule as a left and right
+      module where the two actions commute.
+
+.. TODO::
+
+    - Design and implement an idiom for the definition of an axiom by a join
+      category.
+
+    - Or support more advanced joins, through some hook or registration
+      process to specify that a given category *is* the intersection of two
+      (or more) categories.
+
+    - Or at least improve the above workaround to avoid the last issue; this
+      possibly could be achieved using a class ``Magmas.Distributive`` with a
+      bit of ``__classcall__`` magic.
+
+Handling multiple axioms, arborescence structure of the code
+------------------------------------------------------------
+
+Prelude
+^^^^^^^
+
+Let us consider the category of magmas, together with two of its
+axioms, namely ``Associative`` and ``Unital``. An associative magma is
+a *semigroup* and a unital semigroup is a *monoid*. We have also seen
+that axioms commute::
+
+    sage: Magmas().Unital()
+    Category of unital magmas
+    sage: Magmas().Associative()
+    Category of semigroups
+    sage: Magmas().Associative().Unital()
+    Category of monoids
+    sage: Magmas().Unital().Associative()
+    Category of monoids
+
+At the level of the classes implementing these categories, the
+following comes as a general naturalization of the previous section::
+
+    sage: Magmas.Unital
+    <class 'sage.categories.magmas.Magmas.Unital'>
+    sage: Magmas.Associative
+    <class 'sage.categories.semigroups.Semigroups'>
+    sage: Magmas.Associative.Unital
+    <class 'sage.categories.monoids.Monoids'>
+
+However, the following may look suspicious at first::
+
+    sage: Magmas.Unital.Associative
+    Traceback (most recent call last):
+    ...
+    AttributeError: type object 'Magmas.Unital' has no attribute 'Associative'...
+
+The purpose of this section is to explain the design of the code
+layout and the rationale for this mismatch.
+
+Abstract model
+^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+
+As we have seen in the :ref:`Primer <category-primer-axioms-explosion>`,
+the objects of a category ``Cs()`` can usually satisfy, or not, many
+different axioms. Out of all combinations of axioms, only a small
+number are relevant in practice, in the sense that we actually want to
+provide features for the objects satisfying these axioms.
+
+Therefore, in the context of the category class ``Cs``, we want to
+provide the system with a collection `(D_S)_{S\in \mathcal S}` where
+each `S` is a subset of the axioms and the corresponding `D_S` is a
+class for the subcategory of the objects of ``Cs()`` satisfying the
+axioms in `S`. For example, if ``Cs()`` is the category of magmas, the
+pairs `(S, D_S)` would include::
+
+    {Associative}                 : Semigroups
+    {Associative, Unital}         : Monoids
+    {Associative, Unital, Inverse}: Groups
+    {Associative, Commutative}    : Commutative Semigroups
+    {Unital,      Inverse}        : Loops
+
+Then, given a subset `T` of axioms, we want the system to be able to
+select automatically the relevant classes
+`(D_S)_{S\in \mathcal S, S\subset T}`,
+and build from them a category for the objects of ``Cs`` satisfying
+the axioms in `T`, together with its hierarchy of super categories. If
+`T` is in the indexing set `\mathcal S`, then the class of the
+resulting category is directly `D_T`::
+
+    sage: C = Magmas().Unital().Inverse().Associative(); C
+    Category of groups
+    sage: type(C)
+    <class 'sage.categories.groups.Groups_with_category'>
+
+Otherwise, we get a join category::
+
+    sage: C = Magmas().Infinite().Unital().Associative(); C
+    Category of infinite monoids
+    sage: type(C)
+    <class 'sage.categories.category.JoinCategory_with_category'>
+    sage: C.super_categories()
+    [Category of monoids, Category of infinite sets]
+
+Concrete model as an arborescence of nested classes
+^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+
+We further want the construction to be efficient and amenable to
+laziness. This led us to the following design decision: the collection
+`(D_S)_{S\in \mathcal S}` of classes should be structured as an
+arborescence (or equivalently a *rooted forest*). The root is ``Cs``,
+corresponding to `S=\emptyset`. Any other class `D_S` should be the
+child of a single class `D_{S'}` where `S'` is obtained from `S` by
+removing a single axiom `A`. Of course, `D_{S'}` and `A` are
+respectively the base category class and axiom of the category with
+axiom `D_S` that we have met in the first section.
+
+At this point, we urge the reader to explore the code of
+:class:`Magmas` and
+:class:`~.distributive_magmas_and_additive_magmas.DistributiveMagmasAndAdditiveMagmas`
+and see how the arborescence structure on the categories with axioms
+is reflected by the nesting of category classes.
+
+Discussion of the design
+^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+
+Performance
+~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Thanks to the arborescence structure on subsets of axioms,
+constructing the hierarchy of categories and computing intersections
+can be made efficient with, roughly speaking, a linear/quadratic
+complexity in the size of the involved category hierarchy multiplied
+by the number of axioms (see Section :ref:`axioms-algorithmic`). This
+is to be put in perspective with the manipulation of arbitrary
+collections of subsets (aka boolean functions) which can easily raise
+NP-hard problems.
+
+Furthermore, thanks to its locality, the algorithms can be made
+suitably lazy: in particular, only the involved category classes need
+to be imported.
+
+Flexibility
+~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+This design also brings in quite some flexibility, with the
+possibility to support features such as defining new axioms depending
+on other axioms and deduction rules. See below.
+
+Asymmetry
+~~~~~~~~~
+
+As we have seen at the beginning of this section, this design
+introduces an asymmetry. It's not so bad in practice, since in most
+practical cases, we want to work incrementally. It's for example more
+natural to describe :class:`FiniteFields` as :class:`Fields` with the
+axiom ``Finite`` rather than :class:`Magmas` and
+:class:`AdditiveMagmas` with all (or at least sufficiently many) of
+the following axioms::
+
+    sage: sorted(Fields().axioms())
+    ['AdditiveAssociative', 'AdditiveCommutative', 'AdditiveInverse',
+     'AdditiveUnital', 'Associative', 'Commutative', 'Distributive',
+     'Division', 'NoZeroDivisors', 'Unital']
+
+The main limitation is that the infrastructure currently imposes to be
+incremental by steps of a single axiom.
+
+In practice, among the roughly 60 categories with axioms that are
+currently implemented in Sage, most admitted a (rather) natural choice
+of a base category and single axiom to add. For example, one usually
+thinks more naturally of a monoid as a semigroup which is unital
+rather than as a unital magma which is associative. Modeling this
+asymmetry in the code actually brings a bonus: it is used for printing
+out categories in a (heuristically) mathematician-friendly way::
+
+    sage: Magmas().Commutative().Associative()
+    Category of commutative semigroups
+
+Only in a few cases is a choice made that feels mathematically
+arbitrary. This is essentially in the chain of nested classes
+:class:`.distributive_magmas_and_additive_magmas.DistributiveMagmasAndAdditiveMagmas.AdditiveAssociative.AdditiveCommutative.AdditiveUnital.Associative`.
+
+Placeholder classes
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Given that we can only add a single axiom at a time when implementing
+a :class:`CategoryWithAxiom`, we need to create a few category classes
+that are just placeholders. For the worst example, see the chain of
+nested classes
+:class:`.distributive_magmas_and_additive_magmas.DistributiveMagmasAndAdditiveMagmas.AdditiveAssociative.AdditiveCommutative.AdditiveUnital.Associative`.
+
+This is suboptimal, but fits within the scope of the axiom
+infrastructure which is to reduce a potentially exponential number of
+placeholder category classes to just a couple.
+
+Note also that, in the above example, it's likely that some of the
+intermediate classes will grow to non placeholder ones, as people will
+explore more weaker variants of rings.
+
+Mismatch between the arborescence of nested classes and the hierarchy of categories
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+The fact that the hierarchy relation between categories is not
+reflected directly as a relation between the classes may sound
+suspicious at first! However, as mentioned in the primer, this is
+actually a big selling point of the axioms infrastructure: by
+calculating automatically the hierarchy relation between categories
+with axioms one avoids the nightmare of maintaining it by hand.
+Instead, only a rather minimal number of links needs to be maintained
+in the code (one per category with axiom).
+
+Besides, with the flexibility introduced by runtime deduction rules
+(see below), the hierarchy of categories may depend on the parameters
+of the categories and not just their class. So it's fine to make it
+clear from the onset that the two relations do not match.
+
+Evolutivity
+~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+At this point, the arborescence structure has to be hardcoded by hand
+with the annoyances we have seen. This does not preclude, in a future
+iteration, to design and implement some idiom for categories with
+axioms that adds several axioms at once to a base category; maybe some
+variation around::
+
+    class DistributiveMagmasAndAdditiveMagmas:
+        ...
+
+        @category_with_axiom(
+            AdditiveAssociative,
+            AdditiveCommutative,
+            AdditiveUnital,
+            AdditiveInverse,
+            Associative)
+        def _(): return LazyImport('sage.categories.rngs', 'Rngs', at_startup=True)
+
+or::
+
+    register_axiom_category(DistributiveMagmasAndAdditiveMagmas,
+                            {AdditiveAssociative,
+                             AdditiveCommutative,
+                             AdditiveUnital,
+                             AdditiveInverse,
+                             Associative},
+                            'sage.categories.rngs', 'Rngs', at_startup=True)
+
+The infrastructure would then be in charge of building the appropriate
+arborescence under the hood. Or rely on some database (see discussion
+on :issue:`10963`, in particular at the end of comment 332).
+
+Axioms defined upon other axioms
+^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+
+Sometimes an axiom can only be defined when some other axiom
+holds. For example, the axiom ``NoZeroDivisors`` only makes sense if
+there is a zero, that is if the axiom ``AdditiveUnital`` holds. Hence,
+for the category
+:class:`~.magmas_and_additive_magmas.MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas`, we
+consider in the abstract model only those subsets of axioms where the
+presence of ``NoZeroDivisors`` implies that of ``AdditiveUnital``.  We
+also want the axiom to be only available if meaningful::
+
+    sage: Rings().NoZeroDivisors()
+    Category of domains
+    sage: Rings().Commutative().NoZeroDivisors()
+    Category of integral domains
+    sage: Semirings().NoZeroDivisors()
+    Traceback (most recent call last):
+    ...
+    AttributeError: 'Semirings_with_category' object has no attribute 'NoZeroDivisors'...
+
+Concretely, this is to be implemented by defining the new axiom in the
+(``SubcategoryMethods`` nested class of the) appropriate category with
+axiom. For example the axiom ``NoZeroDivisors`` would be naturally
+defined in
+:class:`.magmas_and_additive_magmas.MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas.Distributive.AdditiveUnital`.
+
+.. NOTE::
+
+    The axiom ``NoZeroDivisors`` is currently defined in
+    :class:`Rings`, by simple lack of need for the feature; it should
+    be lifted up as soon as relevant, that is when some code will be
+    available for parents with no zero divisors that are not
+    necessarily rings.
+
+.. _axioms-deduction-rules:
+
+Deduction rules
+^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+
+A similar situation is when an axiom ``A`` of a category ``Cs``
+implies some other axiom ``B``, with the same consequence as above on
+the subsets of axioms appearing in the abstract model. For example, a
+division ring necessarily has no zero divisors::
+
+    sage: 'NoZeroDivisors' in Rings().Division().axioms()
+    True
+    sage: 'NoZeroDivisors' in Rings().axioms()
+    False
+
+This deduction rule is implemented by the method
+:meth:`Rings.Division.extra_super_categories`::
+
+    sage: Rings().Division().extra_super_categories()
+    (Category of domains,)
+
+In general, this is to be implemented by a method
+``Cs.A.extra_super_categories`` returning a tuple ``(Cs().B(),)``, or
+preferably ``(Ds().B(),)`` where ``Ds`` is the category defining the
+axiom ``B``.
+
+This follows the same idiom as for deduction rules about functorial
+constructions (see :meth:`.covariant_functorial_construction.CovariantConstructionCategory.extra_super_categories`).
+For example, the fact that a Cartesian product of associative magmas
+(i.e. of semigroups) is an associative magma is implemented in
+:meth:`Semigroups.CartesianProducts.extra_super_categories`::
+
+    sage: Magmas().Associative()
+    Category of semigroups
+    sage: Magmas().Associative().CartesianProducts().extra_super_categories()
+    [Category of semigroups]
+
+Similarly, the fact that the algebra of a commutative magma is
+commutative is implemented in
+:meth:`Magmas.Commutative.Algebras.extra_super_categories`::
+
+    sage: Magmas().Commutative().Algebras(QQ).extra_super_categories()
+    [Category of commutative magmas]
+
+.. WARNING::
+
+    In some situations this idiom is inapplicable as it would require
+    to implement two classes for the same category. This is the
+    purpose of the next section.
+
+Special case
+~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+In the previous examples, the deduction rule only had an influence on
+the super categories of the category with axiom being constructed. For
+example, when constructing ``Rings().Division()``, the rule
+:meth:`Rings.Division.extra_super_categories` simply adds
+``Rings().NoZeroDivisors()`` as a super category thereof.
+
+In some situations this idiom is inapplicable because a class for the
+category with axiom under construction already exists elsewhere. Take
+for example Wedderburn's theorem: any finite division ring is
+commutative, i.e. is a finite field. In other words,
+``DivisionRings().Finite()`` *coincides* with ``Fields().Finite()``::
+
+        sage: DivisionRings().Finite()
+        Category of finite enumerated fields
+        sage: DivisionRings().Finite() is Fields().Finite()
+        True
+
+Therefore we cannot create a class ``DivisionRings.Finite`` to hold
+the desired ``extra_super_categories`` method, because there is
+already a class for this category with axiom, namely
+``Fields.Finite``.
+
+A natural idiom would be to have ``DivisionRings.Finite`` be a link to
+``Fields.Finite`` (locally introducing an undirected cycle in the
+arborescence of nested classes). It would be a bit tricky to implement
+though, since one would need to detect, upon constructing
+``DivisionRings().Finite()``, that ``DivisionRings.Finite`` is
+actually ``Fields.Finite``, in order to construct appropriately
+``Fields().Finite()``; and reciprocally, upon computing the super
+categories of ``Fields().Finite()``, to not try to add
+``DivisionRings().Finite()`` as a super category.
+
+Instead the current idiom is to have a method
+``DivisionRings.Finite_extra_super_categories`` which mimics the
+behavior of the would-be
+``DivisionRings.Finite.extra_super_categories``::
+
+    sage: DivisionRings().Finite_extra_super_categories()
+    (Category of commutative magmas,)
+
+This idiom is admittedly rudimentary, but consistent with how
+mathematical facts specifying non trivial inclusion relations between
+categories are implemented elsewhere in the various
+``extra_super_categories`` methods of axiom categories and covariant
+functorial constructions. Besides, it gives a natural spot (the
+docstring of the method) to document and test the modeling of the
+mathematical fact. Finally, Wedderburn's theorem is arguably a theorem
+about division rings (in the context of division rings, finiteness
+implies commutativity) and therefore lives naturally in
+:class:`DivisionRings`.
+
+An alternative would be to implement the category of finite division
+rings (i.e. finite fields) in a class ``DivisionRings.Finite`` rather
+than ``Fields.Finite``::
+
+    sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import CategoryWithAxiom
+
+    sage: class MyDivisionRings(Category):
+    ....:     def super_categories(self):
+    ....:         return [Rings()]
+
+    sage: class MyFields(Category):
+    ....:     def super_categories(self):
+    ....:         return [MyDivisionRings()]
+
+    sage: class MyFiniteFields(CategoryWithAxiom):
+    ....:     _base_category_class_and_axiom = (MyDivisionRings, "Finite")
+    ....:     def extra_super_categories(self): # Wedderburn's theorem
+    ....:         return [MyFields()]
+
+    sage: MyDivisionRings.Finite = MyFiniteFields
+
+    sage: MyDivisionRings().Finite()
+    Category of my finite fields
+    sage: MyFields().Finite() is MyDivisionRings().Finite()
+    True
+
+In general, if several categories ``C1s()``, ``C2s()``, ... are mapped to
+the same category when applying some axiom ``A`` (that is ``C1s().A()
+== C2s().A() == ...``), then one should be careful to implement this
+category in a single class ``Cs.A``, and set up methods
+``extra_super_categories`` or ``A_extra_super_categories`` methods as
+appropriate. Each such method should return something like
+``[C2s()]`` and not ``[C2s().A()]`` for the latter would likely lead
+to an infinite recursion.
+
+.. TOPIC:: Design discussion
+
+    Supporting similar deduction rules will be an important feature in
+    the future, with quite a few occurrences already implemented in
+    upcoming issues. For the time being though there is a single
+    occurrence of this idiom outside of the tests. So this would be an
+    easy thing to refactor after :issue:`10963` if a better idiom is
+    found.
+
+Larger synthetic examples
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+We now consider some larger synthetic examples to check that the
+machinery works as expected. Let us start with a category defining a
+bunch of axioms, using :func:`axiom` for conciseness (don't do it for
+real axioms; they deserve a full documentation!)::
+
+    sage: from sage.categories.category_singleton import Category_singleton
+    sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import axiom
+    sage: import sage.categories.category_with_axiom
+    sage: all_axioms = sage.categories.category_with_axiom.all_axioms
+    sage: all_axioms += ("B","C","D","E","F")
+
+    sage: class As(Category_singleton):
+    ....:     def super_categories(self):
+    ....:         return [Objects()]
+    ....:
+    ....:     class SubcategoryMethods:
+    ....:         B = axiom("B")
+    ....:         C = axiom("C")
+    ....:         D = axiom("D")
+    ....:         E = axiom("E")
+    ....:         F = axiom("F")
+    ....:
+    ....:     class B(CategoryWithAxiom):
+    ....:         pass
+    ....:     class C(CategoryWithAxiom):
+    ....:         pass
+    ....:     class D(CategoryWithAxiom):
+    ....:         pass
+    ....:     class E(CategoryWithAxiom):
+    ....:         pass
+    ....:     class F(CategoryWithAxiom):
+    ....:         pass
+
+Now we construct a subcategory where, by some theorem of William,
+axioms ``B`` and ``C`` together are equivalent to ``E`` and ``F``
+together::
+
+    sage: class A1s(Category_singleton):
+    ....:     def super_categories(self):
+    ....:         return [As()]
+    ....:
+    ....:     class B(CategoryWithAxiom):
+    ....:         def C_extra_super_categories(self):
+    ....:             return [As().E(), As().F()]
+    ....:
+    ....:     class E(CategoryWithAxiom):
+    ....:         def F_extra_super_categories(self):
+    ....:             return [As().B(), As().C()]
+
+    sage: A1s().B().C()
+    Category of e f a1s
+
+The axioms ``B`` and ``C`` do not show up in the name of the obtained
+category because, for concision, the printing uses some heuristics to
+not show axioms that are implied by others. But they are satisfied::
+
+    sage: sorted(A1s().B().C().axioms())
+    ['B', 'C', 'E', 'F']
+
+Note also that this is a join category::
+
+    sage: type(A1s().B().C())
+    <class 'sage.categories.category.JoinCategory_with_category'>
+    sage: A1s().B().C().super_categories()
+    [Category of e a1s,
+     Category of f as,
+     Category of b a1s,
+     Category of c as]
+
+As desired, William's theorem holds::
+
+    sage: A1s().B().C() is A1s().E().F()
+    True
+
+and propagates appropriately to subcategories::
+
+    sage: C =  A1s().E().F().D().B().C()
+    sage: C is A1s().B().C().E().F().D()  # commutativity
+    True
+    sage: C is A1s().E().F().E().F().D()  # William's theorem
+    True
+    sage: C is A1s().E().E().F().F().D()  # commutativity
+    True
+    sage: C is A1s().E().F().D()          # idempotency
+    True
+    sage: C is A1s().D().E().F()
+    True
+
+In this quick variant, we actually implement the category of ``b c
+a2s``, and choose to do so in ``A2s.B.C``::
+
+    sage: class A2s(Category_singleton):
+    ....:     def super_categories(self):
+    ....:         return [As()]
+    ....:
+    ....:     class B(CategoryWithAxiom):
+    ....:         class C(CategoryWithAxiom):
+    ....:             def extra_super_categories(self):
+    ....:                 return [As().E(), As().F()]
+    ....:
+    ....:     class E(CategoryWithAxiom):
+    ....:         def F_extra_super_categories(self):
+    ....:             return [As().B(), As().C()]
+
+
+    sage: A2s().B().C()
+    Category of e f a2s
+    sage: sorted(A2s().B().C().axioms())
+    ['B', 'C', 'E', 'F']
+    sage: type(A2s().B().C())
+    <class '__main__.A2s.B.C_with_category'>
+
+As desired, William's theorem and its consequences hold::
+
+    sage: A2s().B().C() is A2s().E().F()
+    True
+    sage: C =  A2s().E().F().D().B().C()
+    sage: C is A2s().B().C().E().F().D()  # commutativity
+    True
+    sage: C is A2s().E().F().E().F().D()  # William's theorem
+    True
+    sage: C is A2s().E().E().F().F().D()  # commutativity
+    True
+    sage: C is A2s().E().F().D()          # idempotency
+    True
+    sage: C is A2s().D().E().F()
+    True
+
+Finally, we "accidentally" implement the category of ``b c a1s``, both
+in ``A3s.B.C`` and ``A3s.E.F``::
+
+    sage: class A3s(Category_singleton):
+    ....:     def super_categories(self):
+    ....:         return [As()]
+    ....:
+    ....:     class B(CategoryWithAxiom):
+    ....:         class C(CategoryWithAxiom):
+    ....:             def extra_super_categories(self):
+    ....:                 return [As().E(), As().F()]
+    ....:
+    ....:     class E(CategoryWithAxiom):
+    ....:         class F(CategoryWithAxiom):
+    ....:             def extra_super_categories(self):
+    ....:                 return [As().B(), As().C()]
+
+We can still construct, say::
+
+    sage: A3s().B()
+    Category of b a3s
+    sage: A3s().C()
+    Category of c a3s
+
+However,
+::
+
+    sage: A3s().B().C()           # not tested
+
+runs into an infinite recursion loop, as ``A3s().B().C()`` wants to
+have ``A3s().E().F()`` as super category and reciprocally.
+
+.. TODO::
+
+    The above example violates the specifications (a category should
+    be modelled by at most one class), so it's appropriate that it
+    fails. Yet, the error message could be usefully complemented by
+    some hint at what the source of the problem is (a category
+    implemented in two distinct classes). Leaving a large enough piece
+    of the backtrace would be useful though, so that one can explore
+    where the issue comes from (e.g. with post mortem debugging).
+
+Specifications
+==============
+
+After fixing some vocabulary, we summarize here some specifications
+about categories and axioms.
+
+The lattice of constructible categories
+---------------------------------------
+
+A mathematical category `C` is *implemented* if there is a class in
+Sage modelling it; it is *constructible* if it is either implemented,
+or is the intersection of *implemented* categories; in the latter case
+it is modelled by a :class:`~.category.JoinCategory`. The comparison of two
+constructible categories with the :meth:`Category.is_subcategory`
+method is supposed to model the comparison of the corresponding
+mathematical categories for inclusion of the objects (see
+:ref:`category-primer-subcategory` for details). For example::
+
+    sage: Fields().is_subcategory(Rings())
+    True
+
+However this modelling may be incomplete. It can happen that a
+mathematical fact implying that a category `A` is a subcategory of a
+category `B` is not implemented. Still, the comparison should endow
+the set of constructible categories with a poset structure and in fact
+a lattice structure.
+
+In this lattice, the join of two categories (:meth:`Category.join`) is
+supposed to model their intersection. Given that we compare categories
+for inclusion, it would be more natural to call this operation the
+*meet*; blames go to me (Nicolas) for originally comparing categories
+by *amount of structure* rather than by *inclusion*. In practice, the
+join of two categories may be a strict super category of their
+intersection; first because this intersection might not be
+constructible; second because Sage might miss some mathematical
+information to recover the smallest constructible super category of
+the intersection.
+
+Axioms
+------
+
+We say that an axiom ``A`` is *defined by* a category ``Cs()`` if
+``Cs`` defines an appropriate method ``Cs.SubcategoryMethods.A``, with
+the semantic of the axiom specified in the documentation; for any
+subcategory ``Ds()``, ``Ds().A()`` models the subcategory of the
+objects of ``Ds()`` satisfying ``A``. In this case, we say that the
+axiom ``A`` is *defined for* the category ``Ds()``. Furthermore,
+``Ds`` *implements the axiom* ``A`` if ``Ds`` has a category with
+axiom as nested class ``Ds.A``. The category ``Ds()`` *satisfies* the
+axiom if ``Ds()`` is a subcategory of ``Cs().A()`` (meaning that all
+the objects of ``Ds()`` are known to satisfy the axiom ``A``).
+
+A digression on the structure of fibers when adding an axiom
+^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+
+Consider the application `\phi_A` which maps a category to its
+category of objects satisfying `A`. Equivalently, `\phi_A` is
+computing the intersection with the defining category with axiom of
+`A`. It follows immediately from the latter that `\phi_A` is a
+regressive endomorphism of the lattice of categories. It restricts
+to a regressive endomorphism ``Cs() |-> Cs().A()``
+on the lattice of constructible categories.
+
+This endomorphism may have non trivial fibers, as in our favorite
+example: ``DivisionRings()`` and ``Fields()`` are in the same fiber
+for the axiom ``Finite``::
+
+    sage: DivisionRings().Finite() is Fields().Finite()
+    True
+
+Consider the intersection `S` of such a fiber of `\phi_A` with the
+upper set `I_A` of categories that do not satisfy ``A``. The fiber
+itself is a sublattice. However `I_A` is not guaranteed to be stable
+under intersection (though exceptions should be rare). Therefore,
+there is a priori no guarantee that `S` would be stable under
+intersection. Also it's presumably finite, in fact small, but this is
+not guaranteed either.
+
+Specifications
+--------------
+
+- Any constructible category ``C`` should admit a finite number of
+  larger constructible categories.
+
+- The methods ``super_categories``, ``extra_super_categories``, and
+  friends should always return strict supercategories.
+
+  For example, to specify that a finite division ring is a finite
+  field, ``DivisionRings.Finite_extra_super_categories`` should not
+  return ``Fields().Finite()``! It could possibly return ``Fields()``;
+  but it's preferable to return the largest category that contains the
+  relevant information, in this case ``Magmas().Commutative()``, and
+  to let the infrastructure apply the derivations.
+
+- The base category of a :class:`CategoryWithAxiom` should be an
+  implemented category (i.e. not a
+  :class:`~.category.JoinCategory`). This is checked by
+  :meth:`CategoryWithAxiom._test_category_with_axiom`.
+
+- Arborescent structure: Let ``Cs()`` be a category, and `S` be some
+  set of axioms defined in some super categories of ``Cs()`` but not
+  satisfied by ``Cs()``. Suppose we want to provide a category with
+  axiom for the elements of ``Cs()`` satisfying the axioms in
+  `S`. Then, there should be a single enumeration ``A1, A2, ..., Ak``
+  without repetition of axioms in `S` such that
+  ``Cs.A1.A2....Ak`` is an implemented category.
+  Furthermore, every intermediate step
+  ``Cs.A1.A2....Ai`` with `i\leq k` should be a category with axiom
+  having ``Ai`` as axiom and ``Cs.A1.A2....Ai-1`` as base category
+  class; this base category class should not satisfy ``Ai``. In
+  particular, when some axioms of `S` can be deduced from previous
+  ones by deduction rules, they should not appear in the enumeration
+  ``A1, A2, ..., Ak``.
+
+- In particular, if ``Cs()`` is a category that satisfies some axiom
+  ``A`` (e.g. from one of its super categories), then it should not
+  implement that axiom. For example, a category class ``Cs`` can never
+  have a nested class ``Cs.A.A``. Similarly, applying the
+  specification recursively, a category satisfying ``A`` cannot have a
+  nested class ``Cs.A1.A2.A3.A`` where ``A1``, ``A2``, ``A3`` are
+  axioms.
+
+- A category can only implement an axiom if this axiom is defined by
+  some super category. The code has not been systematically checked to
+  support having two super categories defining the same axiom (which
+  should of course have the same semantic). You are welcome to try, at
+  your own risk. :-)
+
+- When a category defines an axiom or functorial construction ``A``,
+  this fixes the semantic of ``A`` for all the subcategories. In
+  particular, if two categories define ``A``, then these categories
+  should be independent, and either the semantic of ``A`` should be
+  the same, or there should be no natural intersection between the two
+  hierarchies of subcategories.
+
+- Any super category of a
+  :class:`~.category.CategoryWithParameters` should either be a
+  :class:`~.category.CategoryWithParameters` or a
+  :class:`Category_singleton`.
+
+- A :class:`CategoryWithAxiom` having a
+  :class:`~sage.categories.category_singleton.Category_singleton` as base
+  category should be a :class:`CategoryWithAxiom_singleton`. This is handled
+  automatically by :meth:`CategoryWithAxiom.__init__` and checked in
+  :meth:`CategoryWithAxiom._test_category_with_axiom`.
+
+- A :class:`CategoryWithAxiom` having a
+  :class:`Category_over_base_ring` as base category should be a
+  :class:`Category_over_base_ring`. This currently has to be handled
+  by hand, using :class:`CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring`. This is
+  checked in :meth:`CategoryWithAxiom._test_category_with_axiom`.
+
+.. TODO::
+
+    The following specifications would be desirable but are not yet
+    implemented:
+
+    - A functorial construction category (Graded, CartesianProducts,
+      ...) having a :class:`Category_singleton` as base category
+      should be a :class:`CategoryWithAxiom_singleton`.
+
+      Nothing difficult to implement, but this will need to rework the
+      current "no subclass of a concrete class" assertion test of
+      :meth:`Category_singleton.__classcall__`.
+
+    - Similarly, a covariant functorial construction category having a
+      :class:`Category_over_base_ring` as base category should be a
+      :class:`Category_over_base_ring`.
+
+    The following specification might be desirable, or not:
+
+    - A join category involving a :class:`Category_over_base_ring`
+      should be a :class:`Category_over_base_ring`. In the mean
+      time, a ``base_ring`` method is automatically provided for most
+      of those by :meth:`Modules.SubcategoryMethods.base_ring`.
+
+
+Design goals
+============
+
+As pointed out in the primer, the main design goal of the axioms
+infrastructure is to subdue the potential combinatorial explosion of
+the category hierarchy by letting the developer focus on implementing
+a few bookshelves for which there is actual code or mathematical
+information, and let Sage *compose dynamically and lazily* these
+building blocks to construct the minimal hierarchy of classes needed
+for the computation at hand. This allows for the infrastructure to
+scale smoothly as bookshelves are added, extended, or reorganized.
+
+Other design goals include:
+
+ - Flexibility in the code layout: the category of, say, finite sets
+   can be implemented either within the Sets category (in a nested
+   class ``Sets.Finite``), or in a separate file (typically in a class
+   ``FiniteSets`` in a lazily imported module
+   sage.categories.finite_sets).
+
+ - Single point of truth: a theorem, like Wedderburn's, should be
+   implemented in a single spot.
+
+ - Single entry point: for example, from the entry :class:`Rings`, one
+   can explore a whole range of related categories just by applying
+   axioms and constructions::
+
+       sage: Rings().Commutative().Finite().NoZeroDivisors()
+       Category of finite integral domains
+       sage: Rings().Finite().Division()
+       Category of finite enumerated fields
+
+   This will allow for progressively getting rid of all the entries
+   like :class:`GradedHopfAlgebrasWithBasis` which are polluting the
+   global name space.
+
+   Note that this is not about precluding the existence of multiple
+   natural ways to construct the same category::
+
+       sage: Groups().Finite()
+       Category of finite groups
+       sage: Monoids().Finite().Inverse()
+       Category of finite groups
+       sage: Sets().Finite() & Monoids().Inverse()
+       Category of finite groups
+
+ - Concise idioms for the users (adding axioms, ...)
+
+ - Concise idioms and well highlighted hierarchy of bookshelves for
+   the developer (especially with code folding)
+
+ - Introspection friendly (listing the axioms, recovering the mixins)
+
+.. NOTE::
+
+    The constructor for instances of this class takes as input the
+    base category. Hence, they should in principle be constructed
+    as::
+
+        sage: FiniteSets(Sets())
+        Category of finite sets
+
+        sage: Sets.Finite(Sets())
+        Category of finite sets
+
+    None of these idioms are really practical for the user. So instead,
+    this object is to be constructed using any of the following idioms::
+
+        sage: Sets()._with_axiom('Finite')
+        Category of finite sets
+        sage: FiniteSets()
+        Category of finite sets
+        sage: Sets().Finite()
+        Category of finite sets
+
+    The later two are implemented using respectively
+    :meth:`CategoryWithAxiom.__classcall__` and
+    :meth:`CategoryWithAxiom.__classget__`.
+
+Upcoming features
+=================
+
+.. TODO::
+
+    - Implement compatibility axiom / functorial constructions. For
+      example, one would want to have::
+
+          A.CartesianProducts() & B.CartesianProducts() = (A&B).CartesianProducts()
+
+    - Once full subcategories are implemented (see :issue:`10668`),
+      make the relevant categories with axioms be such. This can be
+      done systematically for, e.g., the axioms ``Associative`` or
+      ``Commutative``, but not for the axiom ``Unital``: a semigroup
+      morphism between two monoids need not preserve the unit.
+
+      Should all full subcategories be implemented in term of axioms?
+
+.. _axioms-algorithmic:
+
+Algorithms
+==========
+
+Computing joins
+---------------
+
+The workhorse of the axiom infrastructure is the algorithm for
+computing the join `J` of a set `C_1, \ldots, C_k` of categories (see
+:meth:`Category.join`). Formally, `J` is defined as the largest
+constructible category such that `J \subset C_i` for all `i`, and
+`J \subset C.A()` for every constructible category `C \supset J`
+and any axiom `A` satisfied by `J`.
+
+The join `J` is naturally computed as a closure in the lattice of
+constructible categories: it starts with the `C_i`'s, gathers the set
+`S` of all the axioms satisfied by them, and repeatedly adds each
+axiom `A` to those categories that do not yet satisfy `A` using
+:meth:`Category._with_axiom`. Due to deduction rules or (extra) super
+categories, new categories or new axioms may appear in the
+process. The process stops when each remaining category has been
+combined with each axiom. In practice, only the smallest categories
+are kept along the way; this is correct because adding an axiom is
+covariant: ``C.A()`` is a subcategory of ``D.A()`` whenever ``C`` is a
+subcategory of ``D``.
+
+As usual in such closure computations, the result does not depend on
+the order of execution. Furthermore, given that adding an axiom is an
+idempotent and regressive operation, the process is guaranteed to stop
+in a number of steps which is bounded by the number of super
+categories of `J`. In particular, it is a finite process.
+
+.. TODO::
+
+    Detail this a bit. What could typically go wrong is a situation
+    where, for some category ``C1``, ``C1.A()`` specifies a category
+    ``C2`` as super category such that ``C2.A()`` specifies ``C3`` as
+    super category such that ...; this would clearly cause an infinite
+    execution. Note that this situation violates the specifications
+    since ``C1.A()`` is supposed to be a subcategory of ``C2.A()``,
+    ... so we would have an infinite increasing chain of constructible
+    categories.
+
+    It's reasonable to assume that there is a finite number of axioms
+    defined in the code. There remains to use this assumption to argue
+    that any infinite execution of the algorithm would give rise to
+    such an infinite sequence.
+
+Adding an axiom
+---------------
+
+Let ``Cs`` be a category and ``A`` an axiom defined for this
+category. To compute ``Cs().A()``, there are two cases.
+
+Adding an axiom ``A`` to a category ``Cs()`` not implementing it
+^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+
+In this case, ``Cs().A()`` returns the join of:
+
+- ``Cs()``
+- ``Bs().A()`` for every direct super category ``Bs()`` of ``Cs()``
+- the categories appearing in ``Cs().A_extra_super_categories()``
+
+This is a highly recursive process. In fact, as such, it would run
+right away into an infinite loop! Indeed, the join of ``Cs()`` with
+``Bs().A()`` would trigger the construction of ``Cs().A()`` and
+reciprocally. To avoid this, the :meth:`Category.join` method itself
+does not use :meth:`Category._with_axiom` to add axioms, but its
+sister :meth:`Category._with_axiom_as_tuple`; the latter builds a
+tuple of categories that should be joined together but leaves the
+computation of the join to its caller, the master join calculation.
+
+Adding an axiom ``A`` to a category ``Cs()`` implementing it
+^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+
+In this case ``Cs().A()`` simply constructs an instance `D` of
+``Cs.A`` which models the desired category. The non trivial part is
+the construction of the super categories of `D`. Very much like
+above, this includes:
+
+- ``Cs()``
+- ``Bs().A()`` for every super category ``Bs()`` of ``Cs()``
+- the categories appearing in ``D.extra_super_categories()``
+
+This by itself may not be sufficient, due in particular to deduction
+rules. On may for example discover a new axiom ``A1`` satisfied by
+`D`, imposing to add ``A1`` to all of the above categories. Therefore
+the super categories are computed as the join of the above categories.
+Up to one twist: as is, the computation of this join would trigger
+recursively a recalculation of ``Cs().A()``! To avoid this,
+:meth:`Category.join` is given an optional argument to specify that
+the axiom ``A`` should *not* be applied to ``Cs()``.
+
+Sketch of proof of correctness and evaluation of complexity
+^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+
+As we have seen, this is a highly recursive process! In particular,
+one needs to argue that, as long as the specifications are satisfied,
+the algorithm won't run in an infinite recursion, in particular in
+case of deduction rule.
+
+.. TOPIC:: Theorem
+
+    Consider the construction of a category `C` by adding an axiom to
+    a category (or computing of a join). Let `H` be the hierarchy of
+    implemented categories above `C`. Let `n` and `m` be respectively
+    the number of categories and the number of inheritance edges in
+    `H`.
+
+    Assuming that the specifications are satisfied, the construction
+    of `C` involves constructing the categories in `H` exactly once
+    (and no other category), and at most `n` join calculations. In
+    particular, the time complexity should be, roughly speaking,
+    bounded by `n^2`. In particular, it's finite.
+
+.. TOPIC:: Remark
+
+    It's actually to be expected that the complexity is more of the
+    order of magnitude of `na+m`, where `a` is the number of axioms
+    satisfied by `C`. But this is to be checked in detail, in
+    particular due to the many category inclusion tests involved.
+
+The key argument is that :class:`Category.join` cannot call itself
+recursively without going through the construction of some implemented
+category. In turn, the construction of some implemented category `C`
+only involves constructing strictly smaller categories, and possibly a
+direct join calculation whose result is strictly smaller than
+`C`. This statement is obvious if `C` implements the
+``super_categories`` method directly, and easy to check for functorial
+construction categories. It requires a proof for categories with
+axioms since there is a recursive join involved.
+
+.. TOPIC:: Lemma
+
+    Let `C` be a category implementing an axiom `A`. Recall that the
+    construction of ``C.A()`` involves a single direct join
+    calculation for computing the super categories. No other direct
+    join calculation occur, and the calculation involves only
+    implemented categories that are strictly smaller than ``C.A()``.
+
+.. TOPIC:: Proof
+
+   Let `D` be a category involved in the join calculation for the
+   super categories of ``C.A()``, and assume by induction that `D` is
+   strictly smaller than ``C.A()``. A category `E` newly constructed
+   from `D` can come from:
+
+   - ``D.(extra_)super_categories()``
+
+     In this case, the specifications impose that `E` should be
+     strictly smaller than `D` and therefore strictly smaller than
+     `C`.
+
+   - ``D.with_axiom_as_tuple('B')`` or ``D.B_extra_super_categories()``
+     for some axiom `B`
+
+     In this case, the axiom `B` is satisfied by some subcategory of
+     ``C.A()``, and therefore must be satisfied by ``C.A()`` itself.
+     Since adding an axiom is a regressive construction, `E` must be a
+     subcategory of ``C.A()``. If there is equality, then `E` and
+     ``C.A()`` must have the same class, and therefore, `E` must be
+     directly constructed as ``C.A()``. However the join construction
+     explicitly prevents this call.
+
+   Note that a call to ``D.with_axiom_as_tuple('B')`` does not trigger
+   a direct join calculation; but of course, if `D` implements `B`,
+   the construction of the implemented category ``E = D.B()`` will
+   involve a strictly smaller join calculation.
+
+
+Conclusion
+==========
+
+This is the end of the axioms documentation. Congratulations on
+having read that far!
+
+
+Tests
+=====
+
+.. NOTE::
+
+    Quite a few categories with axioms are constructed early on during
+    Sage's startup. Therefore, when playing around with the
+    implementation of the axiom infrastructure, it is easy to break
+    Sage. The following sequence of tests is designed to test the
+    infrastructure from the ground up even in a partially broken
+    Sage. Please don't remove the imports!
+
+TESTS:
+
+::
+
+    sage: Magmas()
+    Category of magmas
+    sage: Magmas().Finite()
+    Category of finite magmas
+
+    sage: Magmas().Unital()
+    Category of unital magmas
+    sage: Magmas().Commutative().Unital()
+    Category of commutative unital magmas
+    sage: Magmas().Associative()
+    Category of semigroups
+    sage: Magmas().Associative() & Magmas().Unital().Inverse() & Sets().Finite()
+    Category of finite groups
+    sage: _ is Groups().Finite()
+    True
+
+    sage: from sage.categories.semigroups import Semigroups
+    sage: Semigroups()
+    Category of semigroups
+    sage: Semigroups().Finite()
+    Category of finite semigroups
+
+    sage: from sage.categories.modules_with_basis import ModulesWithBasis
+    sage: ModulesWithBasis(QQ) is Modules(QQ).WithBasis()
+    True
+    sage: ModulesWithBasis(ZZ) is Modules(ZZ).WithBasis()
+    True
+
+    sage: Semigroups().Unital()
+    Category of monoids
+    sage: Semigroups().Unital().Commutative()
+    Category of commutative monoids
+    sage: Semigroups().Commutative()
+    Category of commutative semigroups
+    sage: Semigroups().Commutative().Unital()
+    Category of commutative monoids
+    sage: Semigroups().Commutative().Unital().super_categories()
+    [Category of monoids, Category of commutative magmas]
+
+    sage: AdditiveMagmas().AdditiveAssociative().AdditiveCommutative()
+    Category of commutative additive semigroups
+
+    sage: from sage.categories.magmas_and_additive_magmas import MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas
+    sage: C = CommutativeAdditiveMonoids() & Monoids() & MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas().Distributive(); C
+    Category of semirings
+    sage: C is (CommutativeAdditiveMonoids() & Monoids()).Distributive()
+    True
+    sage: C.AdditiveInverse()
+    Category of rings
+    sage: Rings().axioms()
+    frozenset({'AdditiveAssociative',
+               'AdditiveCommutative',
+               'AdditiveInverse',
+               'AdditiveUnital',
+               'Associative',
+               'Distributive',
+               'Unital'})
+    sage: sorted(Rings().axioms())
+    ['AdditiveAssociative', 'AdditiveCommutative', 'AdditiveInverse',
+     'AdditiveUnital', 'Associative', 'Distributive', 'Unital']
+
+    sage: Domains().Commutative()
+    Category of integral domains
+
+    sage: DivisionRings().Finite() # Wedderburn's theorem
+    Category of finite enumerated fields
+
+    sage: FiniteMonoids().Algebras(QQ)
+    Join of Category of monoid algebras over Rational Field
+        and Category of finite dimensional algebras with basis over Rational Field
+        and Category of finite set algebras over Rational Field
+    sage: FiniteGroups().Algebras(QQ)
+    Category of finite group algebras over Rational Field
+"""
+# ****************************************************************************
+#  Copyright (C) 2011-2014 Nicolas M. Thiery <nthiery at users.sf.net>
+#
+#  Distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License (GPL)
+#                  https://www.gnu.org/licenses/
+# ****************************************************************************
+
+import importlib
+import re
+from sage.misc.cachefunc import cached_method, cached_function
+from sage.misc.lazy_attribute import lazy_class_attribute
+from sage.misc.lazy_import import LazyImport
+from sage.misc.call import call_method
+from sage.categories.category import Category
+from sage.categories.category_singleton import Category_singleton
+from sage.categories.category_types import Category_over_base_ring
+from sage.structure.dynamic_class import DynamicMetaclass
+from sage.categories.category_cy_helper import AxiomContainer, canonicalize_axioms
+
+# The order of the axioms in this lists implies that
+# Magmas().Commutative().Unital() is printed as
+# ``Category of commutative unital magmas''
+
+all_axioms = AxiomContainer()
+all_axioms += ("Flying", "Blue",
+               "Compact",
+               "Differentiable", "Smooth", "Analytic", "AlmostComplex",
+               "FinitelyGeneratedAsMagma",
+               "WellGenerated",
+               "Facade", "Finite", "Infinite","Enumerated",
+               "Complete",
+               "Nilpotent",
+               "FiniteDimensional", "FinitelyPresented", "Connected",
+               "FinitelyGeneratedAsLambdaBracketAlgebra",
+               "WithBasis",
+               "Irreducible",
+               "Supercommutative", "Supercocommutative",
+               "Commutative", "Cocommutative", "Associative", "Inverse", "Unital", "Division", "NoZeroDivisors", "Cellular",
+               "AdditiveCommutative", "AdditiveAssociative", "AdditiveInverse", "AdditiveUnital",
+               "Distributive",
+               "Endset",
+               "Pointed",
+               "Stratified",
+              )
+
+
+def uncamelcase(s, separator=" "):
+    """
+    EXAMPLES::
+
+        sage: sage.categories.category_with_axiom.uncamelcase("FiniteDimensionalAlgebras")
+        'finite dimensional algebras'
+        sage: sage.categories.category_with_axiom.uncamelcase("JTrivialMonoids")
+        'j trivial monoids'
+        sage: sage.categories.category_with_axiom.uncamelcase("FiniteDimensionalAlgebras", "_")
+        'finite_dimensional_algebras'
+    """
+    return re.sub("(?!^)[A-Z]", lambda match: separator+match.group()[0], s).lower()
+
+
+def base_category_class_and_axiom(cls):
+    """
+    Try to deduce the base category and the axiom from the name of ``cls``.
+
+    The heuristic is to try to decompose the name as the concatenation
+    of the name of a category and the name of an axiom, and looking up
+    that category in the standard location (i.e. in
+    :mod:`sage.categories.hopf_algebras` for :class:`HopfAlgebras`,
+    and in :mod:`sage.categories.sets_cat` as a special case
+    for :class:`Sets`).
+
+    If the heuristic succeeds, the result is guaranteed to be
+    correct. Otherwise, an error is raised.
+
+    EXAMPLES::
+
+        sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import base_category_class_and_axiom, CategoryWithAxiom
+        sage: base_category_class_and_axiom(FiniteSets)
+        (<class 'sage.categories.sets_cat.Sets'>, 'Finite')
+        sage: Sets.Finite
+        <class 'sage.categories.finite_sets.FiniteSets'>
+        sage: base_category_class_and_axiom(Sets.Finite)
+        (<class 'sage.categories.sets_cat.Sets'>, 'Finite')
+
+        sage: base_category_class_and_axiom(FiniteDimensionalHopfAlgebrasWithBasis)
+        (<class 'sage.categories.hopf_algebras_with_basis.HopfAlgebrasWithBasis'>,
+         'FiniteDimensional')
+
+        sage: base_category_class_and_axiom(HopfAlgebrasWithBasis)
+        (<class 'sage.categories.hopf_algebras.HopfAlgebras'>, 'WithBasis')
+
+    Along the way, this does some sanity checks::
+
+        sage: class FacadeSemigroups(CategoryWithAxiom):
+        ....:     pass
+        sage: base_category_class_and_axiom(FacadeSemigroups)
+        Traceback (most recent call last):
+        ...
+        AssertionError: Missing (lazy import) link
+        for <class 'sage.categories.semigroups.Semigroups'>
+        to <class '__main__.FacadeSemigroups'> for axiom Facade?
+
+        sage: Semigroups.Facade = FacadeSemigroups
+        sage: base_category_class_and_axiom(FacadeSemigroups)
+        (<class 'sage.categories.semigroups.Semigroups'>, 'Facade')
+
+    .. NOTE::
+
+        In the following example, we could possibly retrieve ``Sets``
+        from the class name. However this cannot be implemented
+        robustly until :issue:`9107` is fixed. Anyway this feature
+        has not been needed so far::
+
+            sage: Sets.Infinite
+            <class 'sage.categories.sets_cat.Sets.Infinite'>
+            sage: base_category_class_and_axiom(Sets.Infinite)
+            Traceback (most recent call last):
+            ...
+            TypeError: Could not retrieve the base category class and axiom
+            for <class 'sage.categories.sets_cat.Sets.Infinite'>.
+            ...
+    """
+    if "." in cls.__name__:
+        # Case 1: class name of the form Sets.Infinite
+        # Start of implementation when #9107 will be fixed:
+        # axiom = cls.__name__.split(".")[-1]
+        # ...
+        pass
+    else:
+        # Case 2: class name of the form FiniteSets or AlgebrasWithBasis,
+        # with the base class (say Algebras) being implemented in the
+        # standard location (sage.categories.algebras)
+        name = cls.__name__
+        for axiom in all_axioms:
+            if axiom == "WithBasis" and name.endswith(axiom):
+                base_name = name[:-len(axiom)]
+            elif name.startswith(axiom):
+                base_name = name[len(axiom):]
+            else:
+                continue
+            if base_name == "Sets": # Special case for Sets which is in sets_cat
+                base_module_name = "sets_cat"
+            else:
+                base_module_name = uncamelcase(base_name, "_")
+            try:
+                base_module = importlib.import_module("sage.categories."+base_module_name)
+                base_category_class = getattr(base_module, base_name)
+                assert getattr(base_category_class, axiom, None) is cls, \
+                    "Missing (lazy import) link for {} to {} for axiom {}?".format(base_category_class, cls, axiom)
+                return base_category_class, axiom
+            except (ImportError,AttributeError):
+                pass
+    raise TypeError("""Could not retrieve the base category class and axiom for {}.
+Please specify it explicitly using the attribute _base_category_class_and_axiom.
+See CategoryWithAxiom for details.""".format(cls))
+
+
+@cached_function
+def axiom_of_nested_class(cls, nested_cls):
+    r"""
+    Given a class and a nested axiom class, return the axiom.
+
+    EXAMPLES:
+
+    This uses some heuristics like checking if the nested_cls carries
+    the name of the axiom, or is built by appending or prepending the
+    name of the axiom to that of the class::
+
+        sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import TestObjects, axiom_of_nested_class
+        sage: axiom_of_nested_class(TestObjects, TestObjects.FiniteDimensional)
+        'FiniteDimensional'
+        sage: axiom_of_nested_class(TestObjects.FiniteDimensional,
+        ....:                       TestObjects.FiniteDimensional.Finite)
+        'Finite'
+        sage: axiom_of_nested_class(Sets, FiniteSets)
+        'Finite'
+        sage: axiom_of_nested_class(Algebras, AlgebrasWithBasis)
+        'WithBasis'
+
+    In all other cases, the nested class should provide an attribute
+    ``_base_category_class_and_axiom``::
+
+        sage: Semigroups._base_category_class_and_axiom
+        (<class 'sage.categories.magmas.Magmas'>, 'Associative')
+        sage: axiom_of_nested_class(Magmas, Semigroups)
+        'Associative'
+    """
+    try:
+        axiom = nested_cls.__dict__["_base_category_class_and_axiom"][1]
+    except KeyError:
+        assert not isinstance(cls, DynamicMetaclass)
+        nested_cls_name = nested_cls.__name__.split(".")[-1]
+        if nested_cls_name in all_axioms:
+            axiom = nested_cls_name
+        else:
+            cls_name = cls.__name__.split(".")[-1]
+            if nested_cls_name.startswith(cls_name):
+                axiom = nested_cls_name[len(cls_name):]
+            elif nested_cls_name.endswith(cls_name):
+                axiom = nested_cls_name[:-len(cls_name)]
+            else:
+                raise ValueError("could not infer axiom for the nested class {} of {}".format(nested_cls, cls))
+    assert axiom in all_axioms, \
+        "Incorrect deduction ({}) for the name of the axiom for the nested class {} of {}".format(axiom, nested_cls, cls)
+    assert axiom in cls.__dict__ and cls.__dict__[axiom] == nested_cls, \
+        "{} not a nested axiom class of {} for axiom {}".format(nested_cls, cls, axiom)
+    return axiom
+
+
+class CategoryWithAxiom(Category):
+    r"""
+    An abstract class for categories obtained by adding an axiom
+    to a base category.
+
+    See the :mod:`category primer <sage.categories.primer>`, and in
+    particular its :ref:`section about axioms <category-primer-axioms>`
+    for an introduction to axioms, and :class:`CategoryWithAxiom` for
+    how to implement axioms and the documentation of the axiom
+    infrastructure.
+
+    .. automethod:: CategoryWithAxiom.__classcall__
+    .. automethod:: CategoryWithAxiom.__classget__
+    .. automethod:: CategoryWithAxiom.__init__
+    .. automethod:: CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names
+    .. automethod:: CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static
+    .. automethod:: CategoryWithAxiom._test_category_with_axiom
+    .. automethod:: CategoryWithAxiom._without_axioms
+    """
+
+    @lazy_class_attribute
+    def _base_category_class_and_axiom(cls):
+        r"""
+        The class of the base category and the axiom for this class.
+
+        By default, and when possible, this attribute is deduced from
+        the name of this class (see
+        :func:`base_category_class_and_axiom`). For a nested class,
+        when the category is first created from its base category as
+        in e.g. ``Sets().Infinite()``, this attribute is instead set
+        explicitly by :meth:`__classget__`.
+
+        When this is not sufficient, that is when ``cls`` is not
+        implemented as a nested class and the base category and the
+        axiom cannot be deduced from the name of ``cls``, this
+        attribute should be set explicitly by ``cls``.
+
+        The origin of the attribute is stored in the attribute
+        ``_base_category_class_and_axiom_origin``.
+
+        .. SEEALSO:: :meth:`_axiom`
+
+        EXAMPLES:
+
+        ``CommutativeRings`` is not a nested class, but the name of
+        the base category and the axiom can be deduced::
+
+            sage: CommutativeRings()._base_category_class_and_axiom
+            (<class 'sage.categories.rings.Rings'>, 'Commutative')
+            sage: CommutativeRings()._base_category_class_and_axiom_origin
+            'set by __classget__'
+
+        ``Sets.Infinite`` is a nested class, so the attribute is set
+        by :meth:`CategoryWithAxiom.__classget__` the first time
+        ``Sets().Infinite()`` is called::
+
+            sage: Sets().Infinite()
+            Category of infinite sets
+            sage: Sets.Infinite._base_category_class_and_axiom
+            (<class 'sage.categories.sets_cat.Sets'>, 'Infinite')
+            sage: Sets.Infinite._base_category_class_and_axiom_origin
+            'set by __classget__'
+
+        ``Fields`` is not a nested class, and the name of the base
+        category and axioms cannot be deduced from the name
+        ``Fields``; so this attributes needs to be set explicitly in
+        the ``Fields`` class::
+
+            sage: Fields()._base_category_class_and_axiom
+            (<class 'sage.categories.division_rings.DivisionRings'>, 'Commutative')
+            sage: Fields()._base_category_class_and_axiom_origin
+            'hardcoded'
+
+        .. NOTE::
+
+            The base category class is often another category with
+            axiom, therefore having a special ``__classget__`` method.
+            Storing the base category class and the axiom in a single
+            tuple attribute -- instead of two separate attributes --
+            has the advantage of not triggering, for example,
+            ``Semigroups.__classget__`` upon
+            ``Monoids._base_category_class``.
+        """
+        base_category_class, axiom = base_category_class_and_axiom(cls)
+        cls._base_category_class_and_axiom_origin = "deduced by base_category_class_and_axiom"
+        return (base_category_class, axiom)
+
+    _base_category_class_and_axiom_origin = "hardcoded"
+
+    @lazy_class_attribute
+    def _axiom(cls):
+        r"""
+        The axiom for this category with axiom.
+
+        .. SEEALSO:: :meth:`_base_category_class_and_axiom`
+
+        EXAMPLES::
+
+            sage: FiniteSets._axiom
+            'Finite'
+            sage: Sets.Finite._axiom
+            'Finite'
+            sage: Algebras.Commutative._axiom
+            'Commutative'
+
+        The result can be less obvious::
+
+            sage: Semigroups._axiom
+            'Associative'
+            sage: Rings._axiom
+            'Unital'
+            sage: Fields._axiom
+            'Commutative'
+        """
+        return cls._base_category_class_and_axiom[1]
+
+    @staticmethod
+    def __classcall__(cls, *args, **options):
+        """
+        Make ``FoosBar(**)`` an alias for ``Foos(**)._with_axiom("Bar")``.
+
+        EXAMPLES::
+
+            sage: FiniteGroups()
+            Category of finite groups
+            sage: ModulesWithBasis(ZZ)
+            Category of modules with basis over Integer Ring
+            sage: AlgebrasWithBasis(QQ)
+            Category of algebras with basis over Rational Field
+
+        This is relevant when e.g. ``Foos(**)`` does some non trivial
+        transformations::
+
+            sage: Modules(QQ) is VectorSpaces(QQ)
+            True
+            sage: type(Modules(QQ))
+            <class 'sage.categories.vector_spaces.VectorSpaces_with_category'>
+
+            sage: ModulesWithBasis(QQ) is VectorSpaces(QQ).WithBasis()
+            True
+            sage: type(ModulesWithBasis(QQ))
+            <class 'sage.categories.vector_spaces.VectorSpaces.WithBasis_with_category'>
+        """
+        (base_category_class, axiom) = cls._base_category_class_and_axiom
+        if len(args) == 1 and not options and isinstance(args[0], base_category_class):
+            return super().__classcall__(cls, args[0])
+        else:
+            # The "obvious" idiom
+            ##   return cls(base_category_class(*args, **options))
+            # fails with ModulesWithBasis(QQ) as follows: The
+            # base_category_class is Modules, but Modules(QQ) is an instance
+            # of VectorSpaces and not of Modules. Hence,
+            # ModulesWithBasis.__classcall__ will not accept this instance as
+            # the first argument. Instead, we apply the axiom to the instance:
+            return base_category_class(*args, **options)._with_axiom(axiom)
+
+    @staticmethod
+    def __classget__(cls, base_category, base_category_class):
+        r"""
+        Implement the binding behavior for categories with axioms.
+
+        This method implements a binding behavior on category with
+        axioms so that, when a category ``Cs`` implements an axiom
+        ``A`` with a nested class ``Cs.A``, the expression ``Cs().A``
+        evaluates to the method defining the axiom ``A`` and not the
+        nested class. See `those design notes
+        <category-with-axiom-design>`_ for the rationale behind this
+        behavior.
+
+        EXAMPLES::
+
+            sage: Sets().Infinite()
+            Category of infinite sets
+            sage: Sets().Infinite
+            Cached version of <function ...Infinite at ...>
+            sage: Sets().Infinite.f == Sets.SubcategoryMethods.Infinite.f
+            True
+
+        We check that this also works when the class is implemented in
+        a separate file, and lazy imported::
+
+            sage: Sets().Finite
+            Cached version of <function ...Finite at ...>
+
+        There is no binding behavior when accessing ``Finite`` or
+        ``Infinite`` from the class of the category instead of the
+        category itself::
+
+            sage: Sets.Finite
+            <class 'sage.categories.finite_sets.FiniteSets'>
+            sage: Sets.Infinite
+            <class 'sage.categories.sets_cat.Sets.Infinite'>
+
+        This method also initializes the attribute
+        ``_base_category_class_and_axiom`` if not already set::
+
+            sage: Sets.Infinite._base_category_class_and_axiom
+            (<class 'sage.categories.sets_cat.Sets'>, 'Infinite')
+            sage: Sets.Infinite._base_category_class_and_axiom_origin
+            'set by __classget__'
+        """
+        # TODO: this is super paranoid; see if this can be simplified a bit
+        if base_category is not None:
+            assert base_category.__class__ is base_category_class
+            assert isinstance(base_category_class, DynamicMetaclass)
+        if isinstance(base_category_class, DynamicMetaclass):
+            base_category_class = base_category_class.__base__
+        if "_base_category_class_and_axiom" not in cls.__dict__:
+            cls._base_category_class_and_axiom = (base_category_class, axiom_of_nested_class(base_category_class, cls))
+            cls._base_category_class_and_axiom_origin = "set by __classget__"
+        else:
+            assert cls._base_category_class_and_axiom[0] is base_category_class, \
+                "base category class for {} mismatch; expected {}, got {}".format(
+                 cls, cls._base_category_class_and_axiom[0], base_category_class)
+
+        # Workaround #15648: if Rings.Finite is a LazyImport object,
+        # this forces the substitution of the object back into Rings
+        # to avoid resolving the lazy import over and over
+        if isinstance(base_category_class.__dict__[cls._axiom], LazyImport):
+            setattr(base_category_class, cls._axiom, cls)
+
+        if base_category is None:
+            return cls
+        # For Rings().Finite, this returns the method
+        # Sets.SubcategoryMethods.Finite, with its first argument bound to Rings()
+        return getattr(super(base_category.__class__.__base__, base_category), cls._axiom)
+
+    def __init__(self, base_category):
+        """
+        TESTS::
+
+            sage: C = Sets.Finite(); C
+            Category of finite sets
+            sage: type(C)
+            <class 'sage.categories.finite_sets.FiniteSets_with_category'>
+            sage: type(C).__base__.__base__
+            <class 'sage.categories.category_with_axiom.CategoryWithAxiom_singleton'>
+
+            sage: TestSuite(C).run()
+        """
+        # A hack to upgrade axiom categories of singleton categories
+        # to be singleton categories themselves
+        if isinstance(base_category, Category_singleton) and not isinstance(self, CategoryWithAxiom_singleton):
+            cls = self.__class__
+            assert cls.__base__ == CategoryWithAxiom
+            cls.__bases__ = (CategoryWithAxiom_singleton,)+cls.__bases__[1:]
+
+        self._base_category = base_category
+        Category.__init__(self)
+
+    def _test_category_with_axiom(self, **options):
+        r"""
+        Run generic tests on this category with axioms.
+
+        .. SEEALSO:: :class:`TestSuite`.
+
+        This check that an axiom category of a
+        :class:`Category_singleton` is a singleton category, and
+        similarwise for :class:`Category_over_base_ring`.
+
+        EXAMPLES::
+
+            sage: Sets().Finite()._test_category_with_axiom()
+            sage: Modules(ZZ).FiniteDimensional()._test_category_with_axiom()
+        """
+        tester = self._tester(**options)
+        base = self.base_category()
+        if isinstance(base, Category_singleton):
+            tester.assertIsInstance(self, CategoryWithAxiom_singleton)
+        if isinstance(base, Category_over_base_ring):
+            tester.assertIsInstance(self, CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring)
+
+    def extra_super_categories(self):
+        """
+        Return the extra super categories of a category with axiom.
+
+        Default implementation which returns ``[]``.
+
+        EXAMPLES::
+
+            sage: FiniteSets().extra_super_categories()
+            []
+        """
+        return []
+
+    @cached_method
+    def super_categories(self):
+        """
+        Return a list of the (immediate) super categories of
+        ``self``, as per :meth:`Category.super_categories`.
+
+        This implements the property that if ``As`` is a subcategory
+        of ``Bs``, then the intersection of ``As`` with ``FiniteSets()``
+        is a subcategory of ``As`` and of the intersection of ``Bs``
+        with ``FiniteSets()``.
+
+        EXAMPLES:
+
+        A finite magma is both a magma and a finite set::
+
+            sage: Magmas().Finite().super_categories()
+            [Category of magmas, Category of finite sets]
+
+        Variants::
+
+            sage: Sets().Finite().super_categories()
+            [Category of sets]
+
+            sage: Monoids().Finite().super_categories()
+            [Category of monoids, Category of finite semigroups]
+
+        EXAMPLES:
+
+        TESTS::
+
+            sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import TestObjects
+            sage: C = TestObjects().FiniteDimensional().Unital().Commutative().Finite()
+            sage: sorted(C.super_categories(), key=str)
+            [Category of finite commutative test objects,
+             Category of finite dimensional commutative unital test objects,
+             Category of finite finite dimensional test objects]
+        """
+        base_category = self._base_category
+        axiom = self._axiom
+        return Category.join((base_category,) +
+                             tuple(cat
+                                   for category in base_category._super_categories
+                                   for cat in category._with_axiom_as_tuple(axiom)) +
+                             tuple(self.extra_super_categories()),
+                             ignore_axioms=((base_category, axiom),),
+                             as_list=True)
+
+    def additional_structure(self):
+        r"""
+        Return the additional structure defined by ``self``.
+
+        OUTPUT: ``None``
+
+        By default, a category with axiom defines no additional
+        structure.
+
+        .. SEEALSO:: :meth:`Category.additional_structure`.
+
+        EXAMPLES::
+
+            sage: Sets().Finite().additional_structure()
+            sage: Monoids().additional_structure()
+
+        TESTS::
+
+            sage: Sets().Finite().additional_structure.__module__
+            'sage.categories.category_with_axiom'
+        """
+        return None
+
+    @staticmethod
+    def _repr_object_names_static(category, axioms):
+        r"""
+        INPUT:
+
+        - ``base_category`` -- a category
+        - ``axioms`` -- list or iterable of strings
+
+        EXAMPLES::
+
+            sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import CategoryWithAxiom
+            sage: CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static(Semigroups(), ["Flying", "Blue"])
+            'flying blue semigroups'
+            sage: CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static(Algebras(QQ), ["Flying", "WithBasis", "Blue"])
+            'flying blue algebras with basis over Rational Field'
+            sage: CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static(Algebras(QQ), ["WithBasis"])
+            'algebras with basis over Rational Field'
+            sage: CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static(Sets().Finite().Subquotients(), ["Finite"])
+            'subquotients of finite sets'
+            sage: CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static(Monoids(), ["Unital"])
+            'monoids'
+            sage: CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static(Algebras(QQ['x']['y']), ["Flying", "WithBasis", "Blue"])
+            'flying blue algebras with basis over Univariate Polynomial Ring in y over Univariate Polynomial Ring in x over Rational Field'
+
+        If the axioms is a set or frozen set, then they are first
+        sorted using :func:`canonicalize_axioms`::
+
+            sage: CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static(Semigroups(), set(["Finite", "Commutative", "Facade"]))
+            'facade finite commutative semigroups'
+
+        .. SEEALSO:: :meth:`_repr_object_names`
+
+        .. NOTE::
+
+            The logic here is shared between :meth:`_repr_object_names`
+            and :meth:`.category.JoinCategory._repr_object_names`
+
+        TESTS::
+
+            sage: from sage.categories.homsets import Homsets
+            sage: CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static(Homsets(), ["Endset"])
+            'endsets'
+            sage: CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static(PermutationGroups(), ["FinitelyGeneratedAsMagma"])
+            'finitely generated permutation groups'
+            sage: CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static(Rings(), ["FinitelyGeneratedAsMagma"])
+            'finitely generated as magma rings'
+        """
+        from sage.categories.additive_magmas import AdditiveMagmas
+        axioms = canonicalize_axioms(all_axioms,axioms)
+        base_category = category._without_axioms(named=True)
+        if isinstance(base_category, CategoryWithAxiom): # Smelly runtime type checking
+            result = super(CategoryWithAxiom, base_category)._repr_object_names()
+        else:
+            result = base_category._repr_object_names()
+        for axiom in reversed(axioms):
+            # TODO: find a more generic way to handle the special cases below
+            if axiom in base_category.axioms():
+                # If the base category already has this axiom, we
+                # need not repeat it here. See the example with
+                # Sets().Finite().Subquotients() or Monoids()
+                continue
+            base_category = base_category._with_axiom(axiom)
+            if axiom == "WithBasis":
+                result = result.replace(" over ", " with basis over ", 1)
+            elif axiom == "Connected" and "graded " in result:
+                result = result.replace("graded ", "graded connected ", 1)
+            elif axiom == "Connected" and "filtered " in result:
+                result = result.replace("filtered ", "filtered connected ", 1)
+            elif axiom == "Stratified" and "graded " in result:
+                result = result.replace("graded ", "stratified ", 1)
+            elif axiom == "Nilpotent" and "finite dimensional " in result:
+                # We need to put nilpotent before finite dimensional in the
+                #   axioms ordering so we do not (unnecessarily) display
+                #   'nilpotent' in 'finite dimensional nilpotent stratified'.
+                # So we need to swap the order here.
+                result = result.replace("finite dimensional ", "finite dimensional nilpotent ", 1)
+            elif axiom == "Endset" and "homsets" in result:
+                # Without the space at the end to handle Homsets().Endset()
+                result = result.replace("homsets", "endsets", 1)
+            elif axiom == "FinitelyGeneratedAsMagma" and \
+                 not base_category.is_subcategory(AdditiveMagmas()):
+                result = "finitely generated " + result
+            elif axiom == "FinitelyGeneratedAsLambdaBracketAlgebra":
+                result = "finitely generated " + result
+            else:
+                result = uncamelcase(axiom) + " " + result
+        return result
+
+    def _repr_object_names(self):
+        r"""
+        The names of the objects of this category, as used by ``_repr_``.
+
+        .. SEEALSO:: :meth:`Category._repr_object_names`
+
+        EXAMPLES::
+
+            sage: FiniteSets()._repr_object_names()
+            'finite sets'
+            sage: AlgebrasWithBasis(QQ).FiniteDimensional()._repr_object_names()
+            'finite dimensional algebras with basis over Rational Field'
+            sage: Monoids()._repr_object_names()
+            'monoids'
+            sage: Semigroups().Unital().Finite()._repr_object_names()
+            'finite monoids'
+            sage: Algebras(QQ).Commutative()._repr_object_names()
+            'commutative algebras over Rational Field'
+
+        .. NOTE::
+
+            This is implemented by taking _repr_object_names from
+            self._without_axioms(named=True), and adding the names
+            of the relevant axioms in appropriate order.
+        """
+        return CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static(self, self.axioms())
+
+    def base_category(self):
+        r"""
+        Return the base category of ``self``.
+
+        EXAMPLES::
+
+            sage: C = Sets.Finite(); C
+            Category of finite sets
+            sage: C.base_category()
+            Category of sets
+            sage: C._without_axioms()
+            Category of sets
+
+        TESTS::
+
+            sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import TestObjects, CategoryWithAxiom
+            sage: C = TestObjects().Commutative().Facade()
+            sage: assert isinstance(C, CategoryWithAxiom)
+            sage: C._without_axioms()
+            Category of test objects
+        """
+        return self._base_category
+
+    def __reduce__(self):
+        r"""
+        Implement the pickle protocol.
+
+        This overrides the implementation in
+        :meth:`UniqueRepresentation.__reduce__` in order to not
+        exposes the implementation detail that, for example, the
+        category of magmas which distribute over an associative
+        additive magma is implemented as
+        ``MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas.Distributive.AdditiveAssociative.AdditiveCommutative``
+        and not
+        ``MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas.Distributive.AdditiveCommutative.AdditiveAssociative``.
+
+        EXAMPLES::
+
+            sage: C = Semigroups()
+            sage: reduction = C.__reduce__(); reduction
+            (<function call_method at ...>, (Category of magmas, '_with_axiom', 'Associative'))
+            sage: loads(dumps(C)) is C
+            True
+            sage: FiniteSets().__reduce__()
+            (<function call_method at ...>, (Category of sets, '_with_axiom', 'Finite'))
+
+            sage: from sage.categories.magmas_and_additive_magmas import MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas
+            sage: C = MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas().Distributive().AdditiveAssociative().AdditiveCommutative()
+            sage: C.__class__
+            <class 'sage.categories.distributive_magmas_and_additive_magmas.DistributiveMagmasAndAdditiveMagmas.AdditiveAssociative.AdditiveCommutative_with_category'>
+            sage: C.__reduce__()
+            (<function call_method at ...>, (Category of additive associative distributive magmas and additive magmas, '_with_axiom', 'AdditiveCommutative'))
+        """
+        return (call_method, (self._base_category, "_with_axiom", self._axiom))
+
+    @cached_method
+    def _without_axiom(self, axiom):
+        r"""
+        Return this category, with axiom ``axiom`` removed.
+
+        OUTPUT:
+
+        A category ``C`` which does not have axiom ``axiom`` and such
+        that either ``C`` is ``self``, or adding back all the axioms
+        of ``self`` gives back ``self``.
+
+        .. SEEALSO:: :meth:`Category._without_axiom`
+
+        .. WARNING:: This is not guaranteed to be robust.
+
+        EXAMPLES::
+
+            sage: Groups()._without_axiom("Unital")
+            Category of semigroups
+            sage: Groups()._without_axiom("Associative")
+            Category of inverse unital magmas
+            sage: Groups().Commutative()._without_axiom("Unital")
+            Category of commutative semigroups
+        """
+        axioms = self.axioms().difference([axiom])
+        return self._without_axioms()._with_axioms(axioms)
+
+    @cached_method
+    def _without_axioms(self, named=False):
+        """
+        Return the category without the axioms that have been
+        added to create it.
+
+        EXAMPLES::
+
+            sage: Sets().Finite()._without_axioms()
+            Category of sets
+            sage: Monoids().Finite()._without_axioms()
+            Category of magmas
+
+        This is because::
+
+            sage: Semigroups().Unital() is Monoids()
+            True
+
+        If ``named`` is ``True``, then ``_without_axioms`` stops at the
+        first category that has an explicit name of its own::
+
+            sage: Sets().Finite()._without_axioms(named=True)
+            Category of sets
+            sage: Monoids().Finite()._without_axioms(named=True)
+            Category of monoids
+
+        Technically we test this by checking if the class specifies
+        explicitly the attribute ``_base_category_class_and_axiom``
+        by looking up ``_base_category_class_and_axiom_origin``.
+
+        Some more examples::
+
+            sage: Algebras(QQ).Commutative()._without_axioms()
+            Category of magmatic algebras over Rational Field
+            sage: Algebras(QQ).Commutative()._without_axioms(named=True)
+            Category of algebras over Rational Field
+        """
+        if named and self._base_category_class_and_axiom_origin == "hardcoded":
+            return self
+        return self._base_category._without_axioms(named=named)
+
+    @cached_method
+    def axioms(self):
+        r"""
+        Return the axioms known to be satisfied by all the
+        objects of ``self``.
+
+        .. SEEALSO:: :meth:`Category.axioms`
+
+        EXAMPLES::
+
+            sage: C = Sets.Finite(); C
+            Category of finite sets
+            sage: C.axioms()
+            frozenset({'Finite'})
+
+            sage: C = Modules(GF(5)).FiniteDimensional(); C
+            Category of finite dimensional vector spaces over Finite Field of size 5
+            sage: sorted(C.axioms())
+            ['AdditiveAssociative', 'AdditiveCommutative', 'AdditiveInverse',
+             'AdditiveUnital', 'Finite', 'FiniteDimensional']
+
+            sage: sorted(FiniteMonoids().Algebras(QQ).axioms())
+            ['AdditiveAssociative', 'AdditiveCommutative', 'AdditiveInverse',
+             'AdditiveUnital', 'Associative', 'Distributive',
+             'FiniteDimensional', 'Unital', 'WithBasis']
+            sage: sorted(FiniteMonoids().Algebras(GF(3)).axioms())
+            ['AdditiveAssociative', 'AdditiveCommutative', 'AdditiveInverse',
+             'AdditiveUnital', 'Associative', 'Distributive', 'Finite',
+             'FiniteDimensional', 'Unital', 'WithBasis']
+
+            sage: from sage.categories.magmas_and_additive_magmas import MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas
+            sage: MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas().Distributive().Unital().axioms()
+            frozenset({'Distributive', 'Unital'})
+
+            sage: D = MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas().Distributive()
+            sage: X = D.AdditiveAssociative().AdditiveCommutative().Associative()
+            sage: X.Unital().super_categories()[1]
+            Category of monoids
+            sage: X.Unital().super_categories()[1] is Monoids()
+            True
+        """
+        # We would want to write the following line:
+        #     return super(CategoryWithAxiom, self).axioms() | {self._axiom}
+        # However one currently can't use super to call a cached
+        # method in a super class. So we dup the code from there ...
+        return frozenset(axiom
+                         for category in self._super_categories
+                         for axiom in category.axioms()) | {self._axiom}
+
+    def _lean_init_(self):
+        """
+
+        EXAMPLES::
+
+            sage: Rings().Commutative().Finite()
+            Category of finite commutative rings
+            sage: _._lean_init_()
+            'finite comm_ring'
+        """
+        # adapted from _repr_object_names_static
+        category = self
+        axioms = self.axioms()
+
+        axioms = canonicalize_axioms(all_axioms, axioms)
+
+        base_category = category
+        while True:
+            try:
+                result = base_category.__lean_init__()
+            except (AttributeError, NotImplementedError):
+                base_category = base_category.base_category()
+            else:
+                break
+
+        for axiom in reversed(axioms):
+            if axiom in base_category.axioms():
+                # If the base category already has this axiom, we
+                # need not repeat it here. See the example with
+                # Sets().Finite().Subquotients() or Monoids()
+                continue
+            base_category = base_category._with_axiom(axiom)
+
+            if axiom == "Finite":
+                result = "finite" + " " + result
+            elif axiom == "Commutative":
+                result = "is_commutative" + " " + result
+
+            # TODO: Handle more of all_axioms here.
+
+        return result
+
+
+class CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring(CategoryWithAxiom, Category_over_base_ring):
+
+    def __init__(self, base_category):
+        """
+        TESTS::
+
+            sage: C = Modules(ZZ).FiniteDimensional(); C
+            Category of finite dimensional modules over Integer Ring
+            sage: type(C)
+            <class 'sage.categories.modules.Modules.FiniteDimensional_with_category'>
+            sage: type(C).__base__.__base__
+            <class 'sage.categories.category_with_axiom.CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring'>
+
+            sage: TestSuite(C).run()
+        """
+        # FIXME: this basically duplicates the code from
+        # CategoryWithAxiom.__init__; but we can't call the latter without
+        # calling Category.__init__ twice. One could instead set
+        # "self.__base", which is done in Category_over_base_ring.__init__,
+        # but then one has to take into account Python's name mangling.
+        self._base_category = base_category
+        Category_over_base_ring.__init__(self, base_category.base_ring())
+
+
+class CategoryWithAxiom_singleton(Category_singleton, CategoryWithAxiom):  # Category_singleton, FastHashable_class):
+    pass
+
+
+"""
+The following workaround is needed until any :class:`CategoryWithAxiom` of a
+:class:`Category_over_base_ring` becomes automatically a
+:class:`CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring`::
+
+    sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import TestObjectsOverBaseRing, Category_over_base_ring
+    sage: from sage.categories.category import JoinCategory
+    sage: isinstance(TestObjectsOverBaseRing(QQ), Category_over_base_ring)
+    True
+    sage: C = TestObjectsOverBaseRing(QQ).Commutative()
+    sage: isinstance(C, Category_over_base_ring)          # todo: not implemented
+    True
+    sage: C.FiniteDimensional()
+    Category of finite dimensional commutative test objects over base ring over Rational Field
+    sage: C.Commutative()
+    Category of commutative test objects over base ring over Rational Field
+    sage: C.Unital()
+    Category of commutative unital test objects over base ring over Rational Field
+
+    sage: C = TestObjectsOverBaseRing(IntegerModRing(2)).Connected()
+    sage: isinstance(C, JoinCategory)
+    True
+    sage: isinstance(C, Category_over_base_ring)          # todo: not implemented
+    True
+    sage: C.FiniteDimensional()
+    Category of finite dimensional connected test objects
+     over base ring over Ring of integers modulo 2
+    sage: C.Connected()
+    Category of connected test objects over base ring over Ring of integers modulo 2
+"""
+
+##############################################################################
+# Utilities and tests tools
+
+
+def axiom(axiom):
+    """
+    Return a function/method ``self -> self._with_axiom(axiom)``.
+
+    This can used as a shorthand to define axioms, in particular in
+    the tests below. Usually one will want to attach documentation to
+    an axiom, so the need for such a shorthand in real life might not
+    be that clear, unless we start creating lots of axioms.
+
+    In the long run maybe this could evolve into an ``@axiom`` decorator.
+
+    EXAMPLES::
+
+        sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import axiom
+        sage: axiom("Finite")(Semigroups())
+        Category of finite semigroups
+
+    Upon assigning the result to a class this becomes a method::
+
+        sage: class As:
+        ....:     def _with_axiom(self, axiom): return self, axiom
+        ....:     Finite = axiom("Finite")
+        sage: As().Finite()
+        (<__main__.As ... at ...>, 'Finite')
+    """
+    def with_axiom(self):
+        return self._with_axiom(axiom)
+    with_axiom.__name__ = axiom
+    return with_axiom
+
+
+class Blahs(Category_singleton):
+    r"""
+    A toy singleton category, for testing purposes.
+
+    This is the root of a hierarchy of mathematically meaningless
+    categories, used for testing Sage's category framework:
+
+    - :class:`Bars`
+    - :class:`TestObjects`
+    - :class:`TestObjectsOverBaseRing`
+    """
+
+    def super_categories(self):
+        """
+        TESTS::
+
+             sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import Blahs
+             sage: Blahs().super_categories()
+             [Category of sets]
+             sage: TestSuite(Blahs()).run()
+        """
+        from sage.categories.sets_cat import Sets
+        return [Sets()]
+
+    class SubcategoryMethods:
+        FiniteDimensional = axiom("FiniteDimensional")
+        Commutative = axiom("Commutative")
+        Unital = axiom("Unital")
+        Connected = axiom("Connected")
+        Flying = axiom("Flying")
+        Blue = axiom("Blue")
+
+    class FiniteDimensional(CategoryWithAxiom):
+        pass
+
+    class Commutative(CategoryWithAxiom):
+        pass
+
+    class Connected(CategoryWithAxiom):
+        pass
+
+    class Unital(CategoryWithAxiom):
+        class Blue(CategoryWithAxiom):
+            pass
+
+    class Flying(CategoryWithAxiom):
+        def extra_super_categories(self):
+            """
+            This illustrates a way to have an axiom imply another one.
+
+            Here, we want ``Flying`` to imply ``Unital``, and to put
+            the class for the category of unital flying blahs in
+            ``Blahs.Flying`` rather than ``Blahs.Unital.Flying``.
+
+            TESTS::
+
+                sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import Blahs, TestObjects, Bars
+                sage: Blahs().Flying().extra_super_categories()
+                [Category of unital blahs]
+                sage: Blahs().Flying()
+                Category of flying unital blahs
+            """
+            return [Blahs().Unital()]
+
+    def Blue_extra_super_categories(self):
+        """
+        Illustrates a current limitation in the way to have an axiom
+        imply another one.
+
+        Here, we would want ``Blue`` to imply ``Unital``, and to put
+        the class for the category of unital blue blahs in
+        ``Blahs.Unital.Blue`` rather than ``Blahs.Blue``.
+
+        This currently fails because ``Blahs`` is the category where
+        the axiom ``Blue`` is defined, and the specifications
+        currently impose that a category defining an axiom should also
+        implement it (here in a category with axiom
+        ``Blahs.Blue``). In practice, due to this violation of the
+        specifications, the axiom is lost during the join calculation.
+
+        .. TODO::
+
+            Decide whether we care about this feature. In such a
+            situation, we are not really defining a new axiom, but
+            just defining an axiom as an alias for a couple others,
+            which might not be that useful.
+
+        .. TODO::
+
+            Improve the infrastructure to detect and report this
+            violation of the specifications, if this is
+            easy. Otherwise, it's not so bad: when defining an axiom A
+            in a category ``Cs`` the first thing one is supposed to
+            doctest is that ``Cs().A()`` works. So the problem should
+            not go unnoticed.
+
+        TESTS::
+
+            sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import Blahs, TestObjects, Bars
+            sage: Blahs().Blue_extra_super_categories()
+            [Category of unital blahs]
+            sage: Blahs().Blue()                          # todo: not implemented
+            Category of blue unital blahs
+        """
+        return [Blahs().Unital()]
+
+
+class Bars(Category_singleton):
+    r"""
+    A toy singleton category, for testing purposes.
+
+    .. SEEALSO:: :class:`Blahs`
+    """
+
+    def super_categories(self):
+        """
+        TESTS::
+
+            sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import Bars
+            sage: Bars().super_categories()
+            [Category of blahs]
+            sage: TestSuite(Bars()).run()
+        """
+        return [Blahs()]
+
+    def Unital_extra_super_categories(self):
+        """
+        Return extraneous super categories for the unital objects of ``self``.
+
+        This method specifies that a unital bar is a test object.
+        Thus, the categories of unital bars and of unital test objects
+        coincide.
+
+        EXAMPLES::
+
+            sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import Bars, TestObjects
+            sage: Bars().Unital_extra_super_categories()
+            [Category of test objects]
+            sage: Bars().Unital()
+            Category of unital test objects
+            sage: TestObjects().Unital().all_super_categories()
+            [Category of unital test objects,
+             Category of unital blahs,
+             Category of test objects,
+             Category of bars,
+             Category of blahs,
+             Category of sets,
+             Category of sets with partial maps,
+             Category of objects]
+        """
+        return [TestObjects()]
+
+
+class TestObjects(Category_singleton):
+    r"""
+    A toy singleton category, for testing purposes.
+
+    .. SEEALSO:: :class:`Blahs`
+    """
+
+    def super_categories(self):
+        """
+        TESTS::
+
+            sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import TestObjects
+            sage: TestObjects().super_categories()
+            [Category of bars]
+            sage: TestSuite(TestObjects()).run()
+        """
+        return [Bars()]
+
+    class FiniteDimensional(CategoryWithAxiom):
+        class Finite(CategoryWithAxiom):
+            pass
+
+        class Unital(CategoryWithAxiom):
+            class Commutative(CategoryWithAxiom):
+                pass
+
+    class Commutative(CategoryWithAxiom):
+        class Facade(CategoryWithAxiom):
+            pass
+
+        class FiniteDimensional(CategoryWithAxiom):
+            pass
+
+        class Finite(CategoryWithAxiom):
+            pass
+
+    class Unital(CategoryWithAxiom):
+        pass
+
+
+class TestObjectsOverBaseRing(Category_over_base_ring):
+    r"""
+    A toy singleton category, for testing purposes.
+
+    .. SEEALSO:: :class:`Blahs`
+    """
+
+    def super_categories(self):
+        """
+        TESTS::
+
+            sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import TestObjectsOverBaseRing
+            sage: TestObjectsOverBaseRing(QQ).super_categories()
+            [Category of test objects]
+            sage: TestObjectsOverBaseRing.Unital.an_instance()
+            Category of unital test objects over base ring over Rational Field
+            sage: TestObjectsOverBaseRing.FiniteDimensional.Unital.an_instance()
+            Category of finite dimensional unital test objects over base ring over Rational Field
+            sage: C = TestObjectsOverBaseRing(QQ).FiniteDimensional().Unital().Commutative()
+            sage: TestSuite(C).run()
+        """
+        return [TestObjects()]
+
+    class FiniteDimensional(CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring):
+        class Finite(CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring):
+            pass
+
+        class Unital(CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring):
+            class Commutative(CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring):
+                pass
+
+    class Commutative(CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring):
+        class Facade(CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring):
+            pass
+
+        class FiniteDimensional(CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring):
+            pass
+
+        class Finite(CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring):
+            pass
+
+    class Unital(CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring):
+        pass