Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

On topological defects in Chern-Simons theory

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Defects from Yang-Baxter solutions make Chern-Simons fusion a non-invertible semigroup.

desk verdict The abelian semigroup results are solid and new; the non-Abelian fusion claim is the right idea but not yet proven. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.11718 v1 pith:L6MUPBQ5 submitted 2024-12-16 hep-th

Alex S. Arvanitakis , Lewis T. Cole , Saskia Demulder , Daniel C. Thompson This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-th
keywords Chern-SimonstheorytopologicaldefectsmodifiedclassicalYang-BaxterequationLagrangiansubalgebrascorrespondencesnon-invertiblefusionsemigroupAdS3gravity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues that three-dimensional Chern-Simons theory with non-compact, non-Abelian gauge groups supports a new family of topological surface defects, obtained by folding the theory and forcing the doubled gauge field to live in a Lagrangian subalgebra of $\mathfrak{g}\oplus\mathfrak{g}$. The relevant subalgebras are built from solutions $R$ of the modified classical Yang-Baxter equation, and their fusion realizes a non-invertible semigroup: some fusions are irreversible and never produce the transparent identity defect. The same semigroup phenomenon appears already in abelian theory when the defining inner product is indefinite, whereas a positive-definite inner product makes the Lagrangian defects fuse like the group $O(d;\mathbb{R})$. This matters because non-invertible defect fusion is usually a hallmark of generalized symmetries, and here it emerges from elementary Lie-algebra data, with direct applications to boundary conditions in AdS$_3$ gravity and higher-spin theories.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is a Lagrangian subalgebra $\mathfrak{h}\subset\mathfrak{d}=\mathfrak{g}\oplus\mathfrak{g}$: a maximal isotropic subspace, closed under the Lie bracket, on which the boundary gauge field $A|_D$ is constrained to take values. In the non-Abelian construction, $\mathfrak{h}=\mathfrak{g}_R=\{((R+1)X,(R-1)X)\mid X\in\mathfrak{g}\}$ comes from an $R$-endomorphism satisfying the modified classical Yang-Baxter equation $[Rx,Ry]-R([Rx,y]+[x,Ry])=-c^2[x,y]$ with $c^2=1$; the standard split-real-form solution acts by $R(H_i)=0$, $R(E_\alpha)=E_\alpha$, $R(E_{-\alpha})=-E_{-\alpha}$. Fusion is computed with the composition rule for Lagrangian correspondences, $\mathfrak{h}_{NI}\circ\mathfrak{h}_{IS}=\Pi_{NS}[(\mathfrak{h}_{NI}\times\mathfrak{h}_{IS})\cap(\mathfrak{g}_N\times\Delta_{\mathfrak{g}_I}\times\mathfrak{g}_S)]$, which identifies the middle gauge field and deletes the middle region. Projectors $P_R$ into $\mathfrak{g}_R$ define the boundary action $S_{\mathrm{tot}}=S_{\mathrm{CS}}+\int_D\langle\langle A,P_R^\perp A\rangle\rangle$, with Stückelberg fields repairing the broken half of the gauge symmetry.

What would settle it

Eliminate the middle-region gauge field $A_I$ directly in the action for two fused $\mathfrak{g}_R$ defects in $\mathfrak{sl}_2$ Chern-Simons theory and compare the resulting projector's image with $\mathfrak{g}_R\circ\mathfrak{g}_R$ from Table II; any disagreement between the direct elimination and the Hamiltonian composition would falsify the claimed fusion law.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's central claim is that the subspace $\mathfrak{g}_R = \{((R+1)X,(R-1)X)\mid X\in\mathfrak{g}\}$ of the doubled Lie algebra $\mathfrak{d}=\mathfrak{g}\oplus\mathfrak{g}$, defined by any skew-symmetric solution $R$ of the $c^2=1$ modified classical Yang-Baxter equation, is a Lagrangian subalgebra, so restricting the folded gauge field to $\mathfrak{g}_R$ gives a topological defect. Fusing two such defects by composing Lagrangian correspondences produces another R-type defect, and the composition is associative but lacks inverses; the paper displays the resulting semigroup tables explicitly, including an eight-element example for $\mathfrak{sl}_2$. In the abelian case the same Lagrangian-family machinery realizes $O(d;\mathbb{R})$ for positive-definite $\kappa$, while for indefinite $\kappa$ the extremal Lagrangians form rectangular band semigroups with non-invertible elements. A separate application to three-dimensional gravity shows that the boundary term generated by the standard R-matrix reproduces the known higher-spin gravity boundary action, and the associated asymptotic symmetry algebra is a single Virasoro copy rather than two.

Load-bearing premise

The calculation assumes that fusing two defects is exactly the composition rule in equation (8), which matches the gauge field on the shared middle slice and then deletes that slice, and that this rule remains correct for non-Abelian gauge groups after Gauss's law is imposed.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In non-compact non-Abelian Chern-Simons theory, R-defects close under fusion as a semigroup, with $\mathfrak{g}_R\circ\mathfrak{g}_R\circ\mathfrak{g}_R=\mathfrak{g}_R$; the eight-element $\mathfrak{sl}_2$ example is Table II.
  • In abelian theory, a positive-definite inner product gives group-like fusion $O(d;\mathbb{R})$, while an indefinite inner product produces non-invertible rectangular band semigroups, as in the $\kappa=\mathrm{diag}(+,-)$ example.
  • The manifold of Lagrangian subalgebras carries a stratified semigroup: the invertible elements form $S_0=O(\kappa)$, and non-invertible sectors satisfy $S_n\circ S_m\subseteq S_{\max(m,n)}$.
  • The R-boundary term reproduces the standard gravitational boundary action, including the usual boundary-gravity term, and generalizes directly to higher-spin $\mathfrak{sl}_N$ theories.
  • The R-boundary conditions for AdS$_3$ reduce the asymptotic symmetry algebra from two Virasoro copies to a single Virasoro copy.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper, quantized fusion will select a discrete subset of the classical semigroup: one can classify which rational Cayley transforms $Q_+Q_-^{-1}\in O(\kappa;\mathbb{Q})$ preserve the $U(1)^{2d}$ lattice and check which entries of Table II survive compact quantization.
  • If the composition rule in equation (8) is independent of the projector details, the fusion law is an invariant of the two Lagrangian subalgebras alone; this can be tested by changing the kernels of $P_{NI}$ and $P_{IS}$ while keeping their images fixed.
  • The same mechanism should appear in any first-order topological theory whose phase space carries a split-signature pairing, so one can look for analogous non-invertible surface defects in four-dimensional BF theory or related doubled formulations.
  • One route to a genuine non-invertible symmetry is to quantize $\mathfrak{g}_R$ and identify the resulting Lagrangian objects in a representation category of the quantum double; this would promote the classical semigroup to a categorical fusion rule.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper constructs topological surface defects in three-dimensional Chern-Simons theory with non-compact, non-Abelian gauge groups. The defects are encoded by Lagrangian subalgebras of the doubled Lie algebra d = g ⊕ g built from solutions of the modified classical Yang-Baxter equation, and the central claim is that their fusion realizes a non-invertible semigroup. The abelian sector is studied in detail: for positive-definite inner product, fusion reproduces the group O(d), while for indefinite inner product it yields semigroups with non-invertible elements, illustrated by explicit examples and fusion tables. The non-Abelian R-defects are then identified with entries of the abelian table, and applications to AdS3 gravity and higher-spin theories are sketched. The manuscript is written in a compact style and relies on the Lagrangian-correspondence framework of ref. [8] for the central fusion rule.

Significance. If the central claim is established, the paper provides an elementary and explicit class of non-invertible topological defects in Chern-Simons theory, with a parameter-free algebraic construction and concrete fusion tables. The abelian examples are explicit, internally consistent, and connect cleanly to earlier work by Kapustin-Saulina and Roumpedakis-Seifnashri-Shao. The connection to Drinfeld-Jimbo R-matrices and to boundary conditions in AdS3 gravity is suggestive and could be useful for chiral higher-spin theories. However, the field-theoretic step that turns the algebraic R-matrix construction into defect fusion in non-Abelian Chern-Simons theory is not fully established in the manuscript, and this is load-bearing for the main non-Abelian semigroup claim.

major comments (3)
  1. [A HAMILTONIAN APPROACH TO FUSION] Equation (8) is imported from the mechanical Lagrangian-correspondence framework of ref. [8] and assumed to be the composition rule for defect fusion in Chern-Simons theory. For non-Abelian g, the Gauss law constraint F = dA + A ∧ A = 0 is nonlinear, so the reduced phase space is the moduli space of flat connections rather than the affine space Ω^1(D) ⊗ d. The manuscript does not prove that composing the Lagrangian submanifolds before symplectic reduction gives the same result as composing the reduced correspondences, nor does it address the necessary cleanness/transversality or holonomy-independence conditions. Since Eq. (8) is the basis for all subsequent fusion tables, this gap needs to be closed by a direct argument or by a precise statement of the reduction procedure.
  2. [R-DEFECTS] The fusion table for R-defects is asserted through identifications with the abelian Table I rather than computed directly from Eq. (8) for the Lagrangian subalgebras g_R and g_{\bar R}. The list after Eq. (24) states relations such as R ◦ R = defect 1 and R ◦ \bar R = defect 2, but no intermediate calculation is shown. Since the semigroup structure of R-defects is the central non-Abelian result, the authors should provide the explicit computation of g_R ◦ g_{\bar R} using Eq. (8), or at least give the general algorithm and the result for the represented cases.
  3. [FOLDING AND DEFECTS] Footnote [15] concedes that for odd-dimensional g, in particular sl2, the elimination matrix Y in Eq. (4) has a null space, so the explicit Lagrangian derivation of the fused defect projector is not given and only the on-shell boundary variation is claimed. The same sl2 case is the primary example in the gravity application in 'APPLICATIONS TO 3D GRAVITY'. This is not a minor technicality: the Lagrangian elimination step that produces the fused defect action from Eq. (4) to Eq. (5) is not valid in this case, and the paper does not provide an alternative derivation, such as a direct Hamiltonian computation of the fusion for g_R and g_{\bar R}. This gap directly affects the main non-Abelian claim and the gravitational application.
minor comments (3)
  1. [FOLDING AND DEFECTS] Equation (3) introduces a Wess-Zumino term SWZ[/CW] without defining the normalization or the precise meaning of the Stückelberg fields; a short clarification would help readers reproduce the formula.
  2. [TABLE II] The caption of Table II refers to 'green and blue' entries, but the table is rendered in monochrome; please restate the block decomposition in terms of row/column indices or use a printable convention.
  3. [QUANTIZATION CONDITIONS] The statement that 'the fusion of eq. (8) does not preserve the quantization condition in general' is important but appears without an example; a one-line illustration would make the claim more transparent.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the fusion semigroup and R-defect construction are computed from an explicit composition rule and an input mCYBE condition, with no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is parameter-free and does not reduce to its own inputs. The abelian fusion tables are obtained by applying the explicit relation-composition rule, Eq. (8), to Lagrangian subspaces h_beta defined in Eqs. (9)-(18), and the non-Abelian R-defects are built from the mCYBE condition (Eq. 21) via g_R = {((R+1)X,(R-1)X)} (Eq. 22); the mCYBE is an input condition, not a restatement of the desired fusion semigroup. The load-bearing composition rule Eq. (8) is imported from ref. [8], a prior published result by one of the authors, but it is an independent, externally available theorem rather than an unverified self-citation that merely restates the paper's conclusion; the present paper applies it to a new class of defects rather than renaming it. The admitted gap in footnote [15], concerning a non-invertible elimination matrix Y for odd-dimensional g, is an incompleteness in one Lagrangian elimination and is explicitly acknowledged with an on-shell boundary-variation argument supplied instead; it is a correctness risk, not a circular step. The gravitational application is an identity check matching known boundary terms to the R-matrix defect action, and no fitted quantity is relabelled as a prediction. Therefore no load-bearing step is equivalent by construction to its own output.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No fitted parameters appear; the continuous parameters beta and omega label families of lagrangians rather than being tuned to data. The paper introduces no new particles, forces, dimensions, or conserved quantities. The R-defects are mathematical constructs built from existing data: R-matrices and Lagrangian subalgebras. The main external inputs are the composition rule for Lagrangian correspondences and the standard Lagrangian-subalgebra characterization of topological boundary conditions.

assumptions (4)
  • standard math Lagrangian correspondences in the Weinstein symplectic category compose via eq. (6), and topological defects correspond 1-to-1 to Lagrangian correspondences.
    Used in the Hamiltonian approach to fusion, eqs. (6)-(8); the paper relies on ref. [8] rather than proving this correspondence.
  • domain assumption A boundary condition compatible with the variational principle and Gauss law must take values in a Lagrangian subalgebra h of d = g(+)g.
    Invoked in Folding and defects and footnote [17]; this is the standard Kapustin-Saulina characterization.
  • domain assumption For split real forms g, the Drinfeld-Jimbo R-matrix exists, is skew and satisfies R^3=R and the c^2=1 mCYBE, making g_R a Lagrangian subalgebra.
    Used in R-defects to construct non-Abelian defects; compact semisimple g admit no such solutions, so the construction applies only to non-compact forms.
  • domain assumption When Y in eq. (4) is singular, the null components of A_I act as Lagrange multipliers and the on-shell fusion still yields h_NS.
    Footnote [15] asserts this without a full proof; it is load-bearing for odd-dimensional or special fusion cases.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On topological defects in Chern-Simons theory." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/L6MUPBQ5

@misc{pith2026241211718,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On topological defects in Chern-Simons theory},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/L6MUPBQ5}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.11718}
}
abstract

We construct a new class of topological surface defects in Chern-Simons theory with non-compact, non-Abelian gauge groups. These defects are characterized by isotropic subalgebras defined by solutions of the modified classical Yang-Baxter equation, and their fusion realizes a semi-group structure with non-invertible elements. From a Hamiltonian perspective, we calculate this fusion using the composition of Lagrangian correspondences within the Weinstein symplectic category. Applications include boundary terms and conditions in $AdS_3$ gravity and higher-spin theories.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Symmetry TFTs for Continuous Spacetime Symmetries

    hep-th 2025-09 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Continuous spacetime symmetries can be encoded in a (d+1)-dimensional BF/Chern-Simons topological field theory, whose boundary reproduces symmetry generators, symmetry breaking, and anomalies.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

33 extracted references · 14 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [8]

    R-DEFECTS Let us now turn to the tools we will need to exhibit topological defects in non-Abelian CS

    does not preserve the quantization condition in general. R-DEFECTS Let us now turn to the tools we will need to exhibit topological defects in non-Abelian CS. The additional re- quirement that the lagrangians be subalgebras (compat- ibility with Gauss’ law) is restrictive; whilst the diagonal g∆ = {(x, x) ∈ d | x ∈ g} , (20) is a subalgebra of d, the anti...

    work page

  2. [15]

    Whilst components of AI transverse to this can be eliminated, the remainder AI enforces the projection into the null space as a Lagrange multiplier

    If dim g is odd, Y has a null space. Whilst components of AI transverse to this can be eliminated, the remainder AI enforces the projection into the null space as a Lagrange multiplier. This phenomenon also occurs in even dimen- sions for some PN I and PIS . Despite differences in the resulting defect actions, the on-shell boundary variation s after fusion...

    work page

  3. [1]

    Gaiotto, A

    D. Gaiotto, A. Kapustin, N. Seiberg, and B. Wil- lett, Generalized Global Symmetries, JHEP 02, 172 , arXiv:1412.5148 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  4. [2]

    Schafer-Nameki, ICTP lectures on (non-)invertible generalized symmetries, Phys

    S. Schafer-Nameki, ICTP lectures on (non-)invertible generalized symmetries, Phys. Rept. 1063, 1 (2024) , arXiv:2305.18296 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2024

  5. [3]

    Luo, Q.-R

    R. Luo, Q.-R. Wang, and Y.-N. Wang, Lecture notes on generalized symmetries and applications, Phys. Rept. 1065, 1 (2024) , arXiv:2307.09215 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2024

  6. [4]

    (12) Performing the elimination of AI we recover a defect ac- tion defined by a projector PN S whose image matches eq

    are Y = β + ˜β, B = Q−AN − ~Q+AS . (12) Performing the elimination of AI we recover a defect ac- tion defined by a projector PN S whose image matches eq. ( 11), and whose kernel is the diagonal h0. A very different feature becomes apparent when κ is indefinite. Whilst hβ of eq. ( 9) remains a lagrangian, Q± need not be invertible. Not coincidentally, such hβ...

    work page

  7. [5]

    Roumpedakis, S

    K. Roumpedakis, S. Seifnashri, and S.-H. Shao, Higher Gauging and Non-invertible Condensation Defects, Commun. Math. Phys. 401, 3043 (2023) , arXiv:2204.02407 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2023

  8. [6]

    Kapustin and N

    A. Kapustin and N. Saulina, Surface operators in 3d Topological Field Theory and 2d Rational Conformal Field Theory, , 175 (2010), arXiv:1012.0911 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2010

Show all 33 references
  1. [7]

    J. R. Fliss and R. G. Leigh, Interfaces and the extended Hilbert space of Chern-Simons theory, JHEP 07, 009 , arXiv:2004.05123 [hep-th]

    2004 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Kapustin and N

    A. Kapustin and N. Saulina, Topologi- cal boundary conditions in abelian Chern- Simons theory, Nucl. Phys. B 845, 393 (2011) , arXiv:1008.0654 [hep-th]

    2011 arXiv

  3. [10]

    ˇSevera, Poisson-Lie T-duality as a boundary phenomenon of Chern-Simons theory, JHEP 05, 044 , arXiv:1602.05126 [hep-th]

    P. ˇSevera, Poisson-Lie T-duality as a boundary phenomenon of Chern-Simons theory, JHEP 05, 044 , arXiv:1602.05126 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  4. [11]

    A. S. Arvanitakis, C. D. A. Blair, and D. C. Thompson, A QP perspective on topology change in Poisson–Lie T-duality, J. Phys. A 56, 255205 (2023) , arXiv:2110.08179 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  5. [12]

    A. S. Arvanitakis, Topological defects as Lagrangian correspondences, Phys. Rev. D 107, 066016 (2023) , arXiv:2301.04143 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Witten, Quantization of Chern-Simons Gauge Theory With Complex Gauge Group, Commun

    E. Witten, Quantization of Chern-Simons Gauge Theory With Complex Gauge Group, Commun. Math. Phys. 137, 29 (1991)

    1991

  7. [14]

    Some non-invertible lagrangians (see text)

    relevant for defects between U (1)2 CS theories imposes the boundary conditions AN 1 = AN 2 , A S1 = −AS2 , (19) 1 : {ut+ + wt⊥ , vt− + wt⊥ } 2 : {ut+ + wt⊥ , vt+ + wt⊥ } 3 : {ut− + wt⊥ , vt− + wt⊥ } 4 : {ut− + wt⊥ , vt+ + wt⊥ } 5 : {ut+ + wt⊥ , vt− − wt⊥ } 6 : {ut+ + wt⊥ , vt...

  8. [16]

    Achucarro and P

    A. Achucarro and P. K. Townsend, A Chern-Simons Ac- tion for Three-Dimensional anti-De Sitter Supergravity Theories, Phys. Lett. B 180, 89 (1986)

    1986

  9. [17]

    Witten, (2+1)-Dimensional Gravity as an Exactly Sol- uble System, Nucl

    E. Witten, (2+1)-Dimensional Gravity as an Exactly Sol- uble System, Nucl. Phys. B 311, 46 (1988)

    1988

  10. [18]

    Apolo, The covariant action of higher spin black holes in three dimensions, JHEP 05, 097 , arXiv:1511.01406 [hep-th]

    L. Apolo, The covariant action of higher spin black holes in three dimensions, JHEP 05, 097 , arXiv:1511.01406 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  11. [19]

    a line of irrational slope R → U (1)2 which is dense in the torus

    Non-compact subgroups of U (1)2d are not closed topo- logically; e.g. a line of irrational slope R → U (1)2 which is dense in the torus. This complicates the reduction of structure group from U (1)2d on the defect

  12. [20]

    category

    A. Weinstein, The symplectic “category”, Differential Geometric Methods in Mathematical Physics , 45 (1982)

    1982

  13. [21]

    This is because symplectic reduction onto the moduli space of flat connections is a lagrangian correspondence; see [ 8] for details

    What must be true is that d A + A2 = 0 on D where A takes values in h. This is because symplectic reduction onto the moduli space of flat connections is a lagrangian correspondence; see [ 8] for details

  14. [22]

    Both the image and kernel of PN S are gener- ated by fusion of the respective lagrangians eq

    In this presentation we set the kernels of the projectors PN I and PIS to be the anti-diagonal, though the result applies more generally to any bi-vector transformation of the kernel. Both the image and kernel of PN S are gener- ated by fusion of the respective lagrangians eq. ( 8)

  15. [23]

    Campoleoni, S

    A. Campoleoni, S. Fredenhagen, and J. Raeymaekers, Quantizing higher-spin gravity in free-field variables, JHEP 02, 126 , arXiv:1712.08078 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  16. [24]

    Llabr´ es, General solutions in Chern-Simons gravity and T T -deformations, JHEP 01, 039 , arXiv:1912.13330 [hep-th]

    E. Llabr´ es, General solutions in Chern-Simons gravity and T T -deformations, JHEP 01, 039 , arXiv:1912.13330 [hep-th]

    1912 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Ebert, E

    S. Ebert, E. Hijano, P. Kraus, R. Monten, and R. M. Myers, Field Theory of Interacting Boundary Gravitons, SciPost Phys. 13, 038 (2022) , arXiv:2201.01780 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  18. [26]

    HigSS- inGG — Higher Structures and Symmetries in Gauge and Gravity Theories

    presented in [ 14]. Previously, we described defects in a folded theory. Now, we shift focus to asymptotic boundary conditions in the gravitational theory obtained from R-matrices. From a Chern-Simons perspective, the topological boundary condition A|∂M ∈ gR translates to (R −...

    2024

  19. [27]

    Campoleoni, S

    A. Campoleoni, S. Fredenhagen, S. Pfenninger, and S. Theisen, Asymptotic symmetries of three-dimensional gravity coupled to higher-spin fields, JHEP 11, 007 , arXiv:1008.4744 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  20. [28]

    T. D. Brennan and Z. Sun, A SymTFT for Continuous Symmetries, (2024), arXiv:2401.06128 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Antinucci and F

    A. Antinucci and F. Benini, Anomalies and gauging of U(1) symmetries, (2024), arXiv:2401.10165 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Bonetti, M

    F. Bonetti, M. Del Zotto, and R. Minasian, SymTFTs for Continuous non-Abelian Symmetries, (2024), arXiv:2402.12347 [hep-th]

    2024

  23. [31]

    Bachas, I

    C. Bachas, I. Brunner, and D. Roggenkamp, A worldsheet extension of O(d,d:Z), JHEP 10, 039 , arXiv:1205.4647 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  24. [32]

    E. D. Skvortsov, T. Tran, and M. Tsu- laia, Quantum Chiral Higher Spin Grav- ity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 031601 (2018) , arXiv:1805.00048 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Sharapov, E

    A. Sharapov, E. Skvortsov, and A. Sukhanov, Matter- coupled higher spin gravities in 3d: no- and yes-go re- sults, (2024), arXiv:2409.12830 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.