Non-invertible SPTs: an on-site realization of (1+1)d anomaly-free fusion category symmetry

Chenqi Meng; Tian Lan; Xinping Yang; Zhengcheng Gu

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 3 cited by

Non-invertible SPTs: an on-site realization of (1+1)d anomaly-free fusion category symmetry

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read An anomaly-free fusion category symmetry is a pair $(\mathcal{C}, f)$, and every (1+1)d SPT phase is a Q-system in the charge category that becomes a matrix algebra when the symmetry is forgotten.

desk verdict Explicit D8 construction settles the trivial-phase question, but the general Q-system classification claim needs a tighter proof. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.20546 v2 pith:ZUXKIGRO submitted 2024-12-29 cond-mat.str-el hep-thmath-phmath.MP

Chenqi Meng , Xinping Yang , Tian Lan , Zhengcheng Gu This is my paper · ORCID

classification cond-mat.str-elhep-thmath-phmath.MP

keywords non-invertiblesymmetryfusioncategorysymmetry-protectedtopologicalphasesfiberfunctorQ-systemmatrixproductoperatorRep†(D8)latticemodel

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 a non-invertible fusion category symmetry in one spatial dimension is not fully specified by a fusion category $\mathcal{C}$ alone; the microscopic definition must include a fiber functor $f:\mathcal{C}\to\mathrm{Hilb}$, which fixes how the symmetry operators act on a tensor-product Hilbert space. With that data, the paper proposes that every (1+1)d symmetry-protected topological (SPT) phase with such a symmetry is described by a Q-system in the charge category whose image under the forgetful functor is a matrix algebra. It proves a correspondence between fiber functors and such Q-systems and gives an explicit commuting-projector lattice model realizing all three $\mathrm{Rep}^\dagger(D_8)$ SPT phases, one of which is a product state. The model also exhibits an $S_3$-duality that permutes the three phases, matching the monoidal automorphisms of the symmetry category. If correct, this provides a systematic lattice-level classification and construction for non-invertible SPTs, including a canonical trivial phase.

What carries the argument

The central object is the onsite matrix-product-operator (MPO) representation of the symmetry, whose virtual bond dimension is forced to equal the quantum dimension of the corresponding object; this is the lattice avatar of the fiber functor. On top of it, the classification rests on the Q-system, a unitary separable algebra object in the charge category, together with the condition that its forgetful image is a matrix algebra. The Q-system supplies the commuting-projector Hamiltonian and the fixed-point tensor network, while the matrix-algebra condition guarantees a unique symmetric ground state and a well-defined edge mode. The charge category itself is the representation category of the Hopf algebra obtained from $(\mathcal{C}, f)$ by Tannaka duality, for example $\mathrm{Hilb}_{D_8}$ for $\mathrm{Rep}^\dagger(D_8)$.

What would settle it

Numerically compute the ground-state degeneracy on a half-infinite open chain at the two non-trivial exactly solvable points $(\lambda_0,\lambda_1,\lambda_2)=(0,1,0)$ and $(0,0,1)$ of the Section II model: the paper predicts a two-fold degenerate edge mode at both, and none at $(1,0,0)$. A tensor-network calculation showing any other degeneracy pattern, or showing that the $S_3$-duality maps the phases differently from the coset action on $S_3/K$, would settle the claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that the right UV description of an anomaly-free fusion category symmetry is the pair $(\mathcal{C}, f)$, and that the SPT phases enriched by this symmetry correspond to Morita classes of Q-systems $A$ in the charge category $\mathcal{C}^\vee_{\mathrm{Hilb}_f}$ for which the forgetful image $\mathrm{fgt}\,A$ is a matrix algebra in $\mathrm{Hilb}$. A Q-system is a unitary separable algebra object; when the symmetry is forgotten it must look like $\mathrm{End}(W)$ for some Hilbert space $W$, which is exactly the condition for a unique ground state in the thermodynamic limit and a stable edge mode. The paper realizes this concretely for $\mathrm{Rep}^\dagger(D_8)$, where the charge category is $\mathrm{Hilb}_{D_8}$: the three Q-systems $A_0=\mathbb{C}e$, $A_1=\mathbb{C}_\omega\langle r^2,s\rangle$, and $A_2=\mathbb{C}_\omega\langle r^2,sr\rangle$ exhaust the Morita classes whose forgetful images are matrix algebras, giving two non-trivial SPTs and the trivial product state. It then shows that the $S_3$ monoidal automorphisms of $\mathrm{Rep}^\dagger(D_8)$ act on these phases by a lattice duality implemented with projective charges, and that the previously proposed cluster-state models become these Q-system models after their MPOs are reduced to the onsite form.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the definition that an anomaly-free fusion category symmetry is a pair $(\mathcal{C}, f)$ with a chosen fiber functor, together with the requirement that 'onsite' means each symmetry MPO has virtual bond dimension equal to its quantum dimension; if one instead treats the bare fusion category as the symmetry, the canonical trivial phase and the Q-system classification do not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For any anomaly-free fusion category symmetry $(\mathcal{C}, f)$, the trivial phase is an integral part of the symmetry data rather than an extra choice: the unit object of the charge category gives a product state that serves as the reference SPT phase.
The classification of (1+1)d SPTs with such symmetries reduces to Morita classes of Q-systems in the charge category whose forgetful image is a matrix algebra in $\mathrm{Hilb}$.
The three $\mathrm{Rep}^\dagger(D_8)$ SPT phases are permuted by an $S_3$ duality realized on the lattice through projective charges, matching the action of the monoidal automorphisms on the three fiber functors.
The cluster-state models previously proposed for $\mathrm{Rep}^\dagger(D_8)$ reduce, after a symmetry-preserving local unitary, to the Q-system models of this paper; the cluster state itself becomes the trivial product state once its MPO is put in onsite form.
The same Q-system criterion identifies the SPT phases for other categories, for example $\mathrm{Rep}^\dagger(S_3\times Z_3)$, which has one trivial and one non-trivial symmetric phase.

Reading between the lines

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

Beyond the paper: if the pair $(\mathcal{C}, f)$ is accepted as the definition of symmetry, then 'anomaly-free' becomes a property of the chosen local realization, not of the abstract fusion category alone; two fiber functors can produce different charge categories for the same $\mathcal{C}$, so the same Hamiltonian can be symmetric in one microscopic description and not in another.
Beyond the paper: the matrix-algebra criterion gives a direct numerical signature: for a Q-system model, the dimension of the center $\mathcal{Z}(\mathrm{fgt}\,A)$ should match the bulk ground-state degeneracy observed in the thermodynamic limit, so tensor-network calculations on the Section II Hamiltonians can test the classification without any categorical input.
Beyond the paper: applying the same Q-system construction to fermionic fusion category symmetries, with the fiber functor landing in super-vector spaces, would predict that fermionic SPTs correspond to Q-systems that are simple in $\mathrm{sVec}$ while preserving fermion parity; an explicit lattice realization would extend the framework to fermionic chains.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Short version: the D8 construction is the real thing—explicit, checkable, and it resolves the dispute over whether non-invertible SPTs can have a trivial phase. The general classification claim, however, is not as general as the abstract makes it sound.

What is new and good: the commuting-projector Hamiltonians realizing all three Rep†(D8) SPT phases, with a product state as the trivial phase, are a concrete advance. The comparison with the cluster-state models [35] is careful and shows those models become the same phases (including trivial) after a symmetry-preserving local unitary. The Q-system criterion—an SPT phase corresponds to a Q-system whose image under the forgetful functor is a matrix algebra—is clean and is proved for fixed-point Q-system models in Section V. The categorical theorems in Section VI are solid as far as I can tell, and the S3-duality construction gives a nice lattice realization of the fiber-functor torsor.

The soft spot is the definition of 'onsite' and the move from fixed-point models to a general classification. The paper claims dualizability forces virtual bond dimension equal to quantum dimension, but the argument only shows that a closed set of dualizable MPOs satisfying the fusion equation has the unique integer solution vs=ds. It does not prove that every dualizable representation of the symmetry is closed in this sense. In Appendix A, the cluster MPO D has bond dimension 4 before reduction; the authors never check whether D itself satisfies the dualizability condition (Eq. 1) before they conjugate it by CZ. If D is dualizable, then the same categorical symmetry data admit two different UV realizations, one with a canonical product state and one without—and the Q-system classification would be a property of the presentation, not of the symmetry. If D is not dualizable, that is easy to say and would settle the point. Either way, Proposition V.3 is a statement about Q-system fixed-point models, not about arbitrary symmetric gapped Hamiltonians, and no completeness argument is supplied. The abstract's unconditional classification overreaches.

The S3-duality section also imposes the Gauss law energetically, which the authors themselves note is a kinematic constraint; it is a reasonable low-energy statement, but not an exact lattice equivalence.

This paper deserves serious peer review. The referee should ask the authors to clarify the status of the onsite criterion and either prove the completeness claim or scale it back. The D8 construction will be cited regardless.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a microscopic framework for (1+1)d SPT phases with anomaly-free fusion category symmetry, defined as a pair (C,f) of a unitary fusion category and a fiber functor. The authors argue that the fiber functor determines an onsite MPO symmetry action, a charge category, and a canonical trivial phase. They classify SPT phases by Q-systems A in the charge category whose image under the forgetful functor is a matrix algebra in Hilb. Explicitly, they construct commuting-projector Hamiltonians realizing three Rep†(D8) SPT phases—one a product state and two with edge modes—and exhibit an S3-duality acting on these phases. They also compare their constructions with the cluster-state models of [35], claiming equivalence after reducing the cluster MPO to onsite form.

Significance. If the classification claim can be made fully rigorous, the paper gives a concrete algebraic handle on non-invertible SPTs: phases correspond to Morita classes of Q-systems, and the trivial phase is canonically fixed by the fiber functor. The Rep†(D8) models are exactly solvable commuting projectors; Propositions V.2–V.4 provide a clean operator-algebraic proof of the fixed-point ground-state characterization, including edge-mode stability. The explicit S3-duality and the reduction of the cluster-state example are valuable constructive results. The main gaps are the completeness of the fixed-point classification and the status of the minimal/onsite MPO condition, both of which are load-bearing for the abstract's unconditional statement.

major comments (3)

[II.A, Eq. (2); Appendix A] The text claims that dualizability plus the fusion rule forces v_s = d_s (Eq. (2)), but the argument assumes the MPO has already been brought to its minimal closure. The cluster-state MPO D in Appendix A has v_σ = 4, and the appendix reduces it to a two-dimensional bond dimension by conjugating with CZ without first verifying that D satisfies the dualizability condition Eq. (1). If D is dualizable, the same categorical data admit two different UV realizations, one with a canonical product state and one without, making the Q-system classification and the existence of a canonical trivial phase properties of the chosen presentation; if D is not dualizable, that needs to be shown, since otherwise the claimed derivation of Eq. (2) does not go through. Either way, the abstract's unconditional classification exceeds what is proved.
[V.A, Proposition V.3; abstract] Proposition V.3 characterizes the ground state of the Q-system fixed-point model, not the ground state of an arbitrary (C,f)-symmetric gapped Hamiltonian. The classification statement in the abstract ('an SPT phase corresponds to a Q-system...') requires a completeness argument showing that every gapped phase with a unique symmetric ground state can be deformed, within the symmetric phase, to a Q-system model. No such argument is given, and the operator-algebraic results in Section V only establish the one-way statement for the fixed-point family. This is a load-bearing gap between the theorem proved and the classification claimed.
[II.D, footnote 56] The S3-duality transformation imposes the Gauss law energetically with J >> 1. Footnote 56 acknowledges that this should be a kinematic constraint. For finite J, the constrained subspace is not exactly invariant under the Hamiltonian, and the claim that the transformed Hamiltonian 'shares the same energy spectrum' and remains gapped is not justified: second-order processes through the high-energy sector can renormalize the low-energy Hamiltonian and, in principle, change the phase. To substantiate the lattice duality, either impose the constraint exactly at the Hilbert-space level or provide a uniform gap estimate showing that the effective low-energy theory is exactly the original H for all J above some finite threshold.

minor comments (4)

[II.A] The notation n_s(g) and n_r(g) is used before being defined; the number-parity maps should be introduced explicitly before Eq. (1) and Table I.
[II.B, Eq. (6); II.D] The maximally entangled state in Eq. (6) is written as a vector in W*⊗W, but in Section II.D it is used as a projector on a link between (i,R) and (i+1,L); the orientation and identification of the dual basis should be clarified.
[VI, Definition VI.5] Phase-equivalence is defined via equivalence of C-modules Hilb_f and Hilb_h, but the preceding theorem and corollaries are phrased in terms of monoidal equivalences π of C; the relation between these two notions should be stated explicitly.
[G.4] The deformation path L∘γ is claimed to connect fixed-point models without a phase transition, but only the gap of each individual model is computed; a uniform (or at least pathwise positive) lower bound on the gap along the path is not given.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the Q-system classification is derived from explicit lattice constructions and independent categorical theorems.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is constructive rather than circular. The central classification result says that an SPT phase corresponds to a Q-system in the charge category whose forgetful image is a matrix algebra. This is proved for the constructed Q-system fixed-point models in Proposition V.3, where the unique-ground-state condition is shown to be equivalent to fgt(A) being a matrix algebra, and the categorical correspondence between such algebras and fiber functors is proved in Theorem VI.4 using independent Morita-theoretic results. The much-discussed 'onsite' condition v_s = d_s is presented as a definitional criterion for the MPO representation, with an argument that it follows from dualizability together with the uniqueness of the positive integer solution to the fusion equations; even if the dualizability of the cluster-state MPO D is not explicitly tested before its reduction, this is a completeness gap about a specific example, not a circular reduction of the classification to its own conclusion. The self-citations to [31] and [45] supply background categorical machinery (charge categories, Q-system fixed-point models) whose stated assumptions do not include the SPT classification being derived. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no claimed result is equivalent by definition to its input. The paper's proposal that an anomaly-free fusion category symmetry is a pair (C,f) is an adopted definition, and the existence of a trivial phase follows from that definition rather than being smuggled in as a conclusion; this is a framing choice, not circular reasoning.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

No data-fitting parameters are used; the central construction has no fitted constants. The main burden is the definitional axiom that the fiber functor is part of the microscopic symmetry data, plus standard categorical classification inputs. The projective charges are internal tools, not predicted entities.

assumptions (6)

standard math Tannaka duality: a fusion category with a fiber functor is equivalent to the representation category of a finite-dimensional Hopf C*-algebra (Theorem C.8).
Used throughout Section III to replace the pair (C,f) with an onsite Hopf algebra action on local Hilbert spaces. Cited from [59].
standard math Q-systems in Hilb_G are classified up to Morita equivalence by pairs (H,psi), a subgroup H of G and a 2-cocycle psi.
Used in Section V.B to enumerate candidate matrix algebras A0,A1,A2 and in Appendix H for S3 x Z3. Cited from [59] and [107].
standard math Rep†(D8) admits exactly three fiber functors, classified by the Tambara-Yamagami category data.
Basis for the claim that there are three Rep†(D8) SPT phases. Cited from [51,52,15].
ad hoc to paper An anomaly-free fusion category symmetry is microscopically defined by the pair (C,f) plus the onsite MPO criterion v_s = d_s.
The paper's central definitional move; it is argued physically rather than derived from prior principles, and it underwrites the existence of a canonical trivial phase.
ad hoc to paper Energetic imposition of the Gauss law with J >> 1 realizes the duality transformation without changing the phase.
Used in Section II.D to implement S3 duality. No rigorous bound or adiabatic path is given; the footnote acknowledges the constraint should ideally be imposed at Hilbert space level.
domain assumption O-type and H-type ground states coincide for the SPT phases considered.
Adopted in Section V.A and footnote 69 to equate the operator-algebraic ground state with the lowest-energy state; the paper argues but does not prove this for all Q-system models.

invented entities (1)

Projective charge spaces W_(a,c), W_(a,b) and their tensor products
purpose: Realize S3 permutations of the three Rep†(D8) phases and parameterize the duality transformation.
They are auxiliary finite-dimensional representations used as construction input; they do not correspond to new predicted particles or observable sectors outside the model.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Non-invertible SPTs: an on-site realization of (1+1)d anomaly-free fusion category symmetry." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZUXKIGRO

@misc{pith2026241220546,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Non-invertible SPTs: an on-site realization of (1+1)d anomaly-free fusion category symmetry},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZUXKIGRO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.20546}
}

abstract

We investigate (1+1)d symmetry-protected topological (SPT) phases with fusion category symmetries. We emphasize that the UV description of an anomaly-free fusion category symmetry must include the fiber functor, giving rise to a local symmetry action, a charge category and a trivial phase. We construct an ``onsite'' matrix-product-operator (MPO) version of the Hopf algebra symmetry operators in a lattice model with tensor-product Hilbert space. In particular, we propose a systematic framework for classifying and constructing SPTs with non-invertible symmetries. An SPT phase corresponds to a Q-system in the charge category, such that the Q-system becomes a matrix algebra when the symmetry is forgotten. As an example, we provide an explicit microscopic realization of all three $\mathsf{Rep}^\dagger(D_8)$ SPT phases, including a trivial phase, and further demonstrate the $S_3$-duality among these three SPT phases.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.20546 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. A TDL is provided by an MPO in the continuum [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. Illustration of the categorical relationship of SPT [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (2 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. Illustration of the categorical relationship of SPT [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. Illustration of the macroscopic local regions. Here [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p038_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

Tube Category, Tensor Renormalization and Topological Holography
math-ph 2024-12 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

For any rigid monoidal category C, the representations of the coend-defined tube category XC are equivalent to the relative center of the Yoneda embedding, with the Drinfeld center Z(C) embedded inside.
SymSETs and self-dualities under gauging non-invertible symmetries
hep-th 2025-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A new SymSET-based construction shows that changing symmetry fractionalization classes can change fusion rules of self-duality defects under non-invertible gauging, yielding new fusion categories such as Rep D16 and Rep SD16.
Gauging or extending bulk and boundary conformal field theories: Application to bulk and domain wall problem in topological matter and their descriptions by (mock) modular covariant
hep-th 2024-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

New classes of boundary and coupled conformal field theories are constructed from Z_N gauging, with a proposed dictionary to topological order, nonchiral anyons, and domain walls.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

123 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

[35]

Y. Choi, H. T. Lam, and S.-H. Shao, Non-invert- ible global symmetries in the standard model (2022), arXiv:2205.05086 [hep-th]

arXiv 2022
[1]

fgt(A) is a matrix algebra, or equivalently dimZ(fgt(A)) = 1

A(C∨ Hilbf )A∼ =C∨ Hilbh ;2. fgt(A) is a matrix algebra, or equivalently dimZ(fgt(A)) = 1. Proof. Let the linear dual of W be W ∗, and W ∗⊗− is automatically a left and right adjoint to W⊗− as linear functors Hilb → Hilb. We want to show that such adjointness lifts to C-module functors. Suppose W⊗− equipped with natural isomorphisms βc⊗ id− : W⊗ f (c)⊗− ∼...
[2]

All the G-SPT phases and three Rep†(D8) SPTs belong to this case; 2.C∨ Hilbf ⁄∼ =C∨ Hilbh , where h and f are not related by monoidal equivalences

h = fπ induces a monoidal equivalence C∨ Hilbf ∼ = C∨ Hilbh and (C,f ) and ( C,fπ ) are not necessarily phase-equivalent. All the G-SPT phases and three Rep†(D8) SPTs belong to this case; 2.C∨ Hilbf ⁄∼ =C∨ Hilbh , where h and f are not related by monoidal equivalences. By Theorem VI.2, there exists an algebra A inC∨ Hilbf such that A(C∨ Hilbf )A∼ = C∨ Hil...
[3]

It is possible that when f andh are not related by monoidal equivalences, it happens to be C∨ Hilbf ∼ =C∨ Hilbh

There might be a situation landing in the middle of 1 and 2. It is possible that when f andh are not related by monoidal equivalences, it happens to be C∨ Hilbf ∼ =C∨ Hilbh . It remains unclear what physical observables detect such an exotic case. In general, the charge category of a fusion category symmetry is not unique, as discussed in scenario 2. C = ...

2023
[4]

Let (A,m,ι ) be a simple Q-system in C∨ Hilbf

Deformation In this section, we show that a Q-system model ( Z, H,A,−m†m) can be deformed into another smaller one (Z, H,AP,−m† PmP ) constructed from the reduced Q-system ( AP,mP,ιP ) without causing phase transition. Let (A,m,ι ) be a simple Q-system in C∨ Hilbf . Deﬁne the parameterized multiplication: m(f ) := f . 40 where f∈C ∨ Hilbf (1,A ). Since A ...
[5]

equivalence classes of ﬁnite tensor categories C with a ﬁber functor F , up to tensor equivalence and isomorphism of tensor functors, and
[6]

32 Appendix D: Algebra Deﬁnition D.1

isomorphism classes of ﬁnite-dimensional Hopf algebras. 32 Appendix D: Algebra Deﬁnition D.1. (Algebra) Let C be a monoidal category. An (associative unital) algebra in C is a triple ( A,m,ι ), consisting of an object A∈C together with a multiplication m :A⊗A→A and a unit morphism ι : 1→A satisfying associativity and identity: (A⊗A)⊗A A ⊗ (A⊗A) A⊗A A ⊗A A...
[7]

There exists a ⋆-homomorphism A≃ ⊕n i=1Mai , where each summand has the usual conjugate transpose †- operation

Show all 123 references

[8]

and those without hat to denote objects in Rep†(H8). As a sanity check, we can show that the above basis satisﬁes MPO basis proper ties in III C, meaning – multiplication: ˆaˆa = ˆ1, ˆb = ˆaˆc = ˆcˆa; – comultiplication: ∆ˆa = ˆa⊗ ˆa, ∆ˆc = ˆc⊗ ˆc, ∆ˆσαβ =∑ γ ˆσαγ⊗ ˆσγβ ; – an...
[9]

Hopf C⋆-algebra is deﬁned in [ 92], and a version of C ⋆-quantum groupoid is deﬁned in [ 61]

For every a∈A, aa⋆ = 0 implies a = 0. Hopf C⋆-algebra is deﬁned in [ 92], and a version of C ⋆-quantum groupoid is deﬁned in [ 61]. Appendix E: Operator algebraic description of ground state Example 7. Consider the 1D quantum Ising model in symmetry breaking phase, c haracteri...
[10]

(A,m,ι ) is a unital associative isometric algebra in C and
[11]

m and m† satisfy the Frobenius condition
[12]

It has been proved in [ 45, 94–96] that 1⇒2

evA :=ι†m :A⊗A→ C and coevA :=m†ι : C→A⊗A is the balanced dual (see C.7) for A. It has been proved in [ 45, 94–96] that 1⇒2. And condition 3 implies that A is symmetrically self-dual, see for example [ 93, 97]. We denote m(n) by multiplying n copies of A’s to a single A. Deﬁni...
[13]

Let (A,m,ι ) be a Q-system in Hilb

Proofs of properties associated to ﬁxed-point operators Proposition G.1. Let (A,m,ι ) be a Q-system in Hilb. The space of ﬁxed-point operators Z(A) is isomorphic to the space of A-A-bimodule operators End A|A(A). Proof. Suppose f∈ Z(A) is a ﬁxed-point operator, then f is a lef...
[14]

Let Ψ({i}) =      A i< 0 M i = 0 B i> 0 and Φ({i,i + 1}) =          1−m† AmA i< −1 1−µ† AµA i =−1 1−µ† BµB i = 0 1−m† BmB i> 0

Generic edge modes Suppose (A,mA,ιA), (B,mB,ιB) are Q-systems in Hilb and (M,µA,µB) a A-B bimodule. Let Ψ({i}) =      A i< 0 M i = 0 B i> 0 and Φ({i,i + 1}) =          1−m† AmA i< −1 1−µ† AµA i =−1 1−µ† BµB i = 0 1−m† BmB i> 0 . The triple ( Z, Ψ, Φ) deﬁnes a 1D ...
[15]

macroscopically local

Ground state degeneracy by taking the thermodynamic limi t We now calculate the ground state degeneracy of the Q-system mo del by taking the thermodynamic limit. Let{LL}∞ L=4 be a sequence of quantum systems, where each LL := ({1,··· ,L}, Ψ, Φ) represents a quantum system deﬁn...
[16]

The groups and cocycles deﬁned in [ 107] are: • ⟨r,a⟩e =⟨r,a⟩: ψe(c,d ) = ψ+(c,d )ψ+(d−1,c −1)∼coh 1 which is a trivial 2-cocycle following from the result discussed above

As a linear category The double cosets ⟨r,a⟩\ (S3× Z3)/⟨r,a⟩ are ⟨r,a⟩, s ⟨r,a⟩. The groups and cocycles deﬁned in [ 107] are: • ⟨r,a⟩e =⟨r,a⟩: ψe(c,d ) = ψ+(c,d )ψ+(d−1,c −1)∼coh 1 which is a trivial 2-cocycle following from the result discussed above. The projective represen...
[17]

⊲” and the right A-action “⊳

As a fusion category The Tambara-Yamagami category TYχ,ǫ G is deﬁned by • an abelian group G and a symmetric non-degenerate bi-character χ :G×G→U (1); • the Frobenius-Schur indicator ǫ =±1. Below we will determine χ and ǫ. We ﬁrst ﬁx the left A-action “⊲” and the right A-actio...
[19]

Chen, Z.-C

X. Chen, Z.-C. Gu, Z.-X. Liu, and X.-G. Wen, Sym- metry protected topological orders and the group coho- mology of their symmetry group, Physical Review B 87, 10.1103/physrevb.87.155114 (2013)

2013 doi
[20]

Chen, Z.-X

X. Chen, Z.-X. Liu, and X.-G. Wen, Two-dimensional symmetry-protected topological orders and their pro- tected gapless edge excitations, Physical Review B 84, 10.1103/physrevb.84.235141 (2011)

2011 doi
[21]

Levin and Z.-C

M. Levin and Z.-C. Gu, Braiding statistics approach to symmetry-protected topological phases, Physical Re- view B 86, 10.1103/physrevb.86.115109 (2012)

2012 doi
[22]

Chen, Z.-C

X. Chen, Z.-C. Gu, and X.-G. Wen, Complete clas- siﬁcation of one-dimensional gapped quantum phases in interacting spin systems, Physical Review B 84, 10.1103/physrevb.84.235128 (2011)

2011 doi
[23]

Wang, S.-Q

Q.-R. Wang, S.-Q. Ning, and M. Cheng, Domain wall decorations, anomalies and spectral sequences in bosonic topological phases (2021), arXiv:2104.13233 [cond-mat.str-el]

2021 arXiv
[25]

Kong, X.-G

L. Kong, X.-G. Wen, and H. Zheng, One dimen- sional gapped quantum phases and enriched fusion categories, Journal of High Energy Physics 2022, 10.1007/jhep03(2022)022 (2022)

2022 doi
[26]

Kapustin, Symmetry protected topological phases, anomalies, and cobordisms: Beyond group cohomology (2014), arXiv:1403.1467 [cond-mat.str-el]

A. Kapustin, Symmetry protected topological phases, anomalies, and cobordisms: Beyond group cohomology (2014), arXiv:1403.1467 [cond-mat.str-el]

2014 arXiv
[27]

Ogata, Classiﬁcation of gapped ground state phases in quantum spin systems (2021), arXiv:2110.04675 [math-ph]

Y. Ogata, Classiﬁcation of gapped ground state phases in quantum spin systems (2021), arXiv:2110.04675 [math-ph]

2021 arXiv
[28]

L. Kong, T. Lan, X.-G. Wen, Z.-H. Zhang, and H. Zheng, Classiﬁcation of topological phases with ﬁnite internal symmetries in all dimensions, Journal of High Energy Physics 2020, 10.1007/jhep09(2020)093 (2020)

2020 doi
[29]

Diatlyk, C

O. Diatlyk, C. Luo, Y. Wang, and Q. Weller, Gaug- ing non-invertible symmetries: Topological interfaces and generalized orbifold groupoid in 2d qft (2023), arXiv:2311.17044 [hep-th]

2023
[30]

Shao, What’s done cannot be undone: Tasi lectures on non-invertible symmetries (2024), arXiv:2308.00747 [hep-th]

S.-H. Shao, What’s done cannot be undone: Tasi lectures on non-invertible symmetries (2024), arXiv:2308.00747 [hep-th]

2024 arXiv
[31]

Schafer-Nameki, Ictp lectures on (non-)invertible gen- eralized symmetries (2023), arXiv:2305.18296 [hep-th]

S. Schafer-Nameki, Ictp lectures on (non-)invertible gen- eralized symmetries (2023), arXiv:2305.18296 [hep-th]

2023 arXiv
[32]

Thorngren and Y

R. Thorngren and Y. Wang, Fusion category symme- try i: Anomaly in-ﬂow and gapped phases (2019), arXiv:1912.02817 [hep-th]

2019 arXiv
[33]

Seiberg, S

N. Seiberg, S. Seifnashri, and S.-H. Shao, Non-invertible symmetries and lsm-type constraints on a tensor prod- uct hilbert space, SciPost Physics 16, 10.21468/scipost- phys.16.6.154 (2024)

2024 doi
[36]

Chang, Y.-H

C.-M. Chang, Y.-H. Lin, S.-H. Shao, Y. Wang, and X. Yin, Topological defect lines and renormalization group ﬂows in two dimensions, Journal of High Energy Physics 2019, 10.1007/jhep01(2019)026 (2019)

2019 doi
[37]

Roumpedakis, S

K. Roumpedakis, S. Seifnashri, and S.-H. Shao, Higher gauging and non-invertible condensation defects, Com- munications in Mathematical Physics 401, 3043–3107 (2023)

2023
[38]

Thorngren and Y

R. Thorngren and Y. Wang, Fusion category symme- try ii: Categoriosities at c = 1 and beyond (2021), arXiv:2106.12577 [hep-th]

2021 arXiv
[39]

Chatterjee, O

A. Chatterjee, O. M. Aksoy, and X.-G. Wen, Quan- tum phases and transitions in spin chains with non- invertible symmetries, SciPost Physics 17, 10.21468/sci- postphys.17.4.115 (2024)

2024 doi
[40]

Ning, B.-B

S.-Q. Ning, B.-B. Mao, and C. Wang, Building 1d lattice models with g-graded fusion category (2023), arXiv:2301.06416 [cond-mat.str-el]

2023 arXiv
[41]

Lootens, C

L. Lootens, C. Delcamp, G. Ortiz, and F. Verstraete, Dualities in one-dimensional quantum lattice models: Symmetric hamiltonians and matrix product opera- tor intertwiners, PRX Quantum 4, 10.1103/prxquan- tum.4.020357 (2023)

2023 doi
[42]

Lootens, C

L. Lootens, C. Delcamp, and F. Verstraete, Dualities in one-dimensional quantum lattice models: topological sectors (2024), arXiv:2211.03777 [quant-ph]

2024 arXiv
[43]

Fechisin, N

C. Fechisin, N. Tantivasadakarn, and V. V. Albert, Non-invertible symmetry-protected topological order in a group-based cluster state (2024), arXiv:2312.09272 [cond-mat.str-el]

2024 arXiv
[44]

Jones and J

C. Jones and J. Lim, An index for quantum cellular au- 46 tomata on fusion spin chains (2024), arXiv:2309.10961 [math.OA]

2024 arXiv
[45]

D. S. Freed, G. W. Moore, and C. Teleman, Topo- logical symmetry in quantum ﬁeld theory (2024), arXiv:2209.07471 [hep-th]

2024 arXiv
[46]

Bhardwaj, L

L. Bhardwaj, L. E. Bottini, D. Pajer, and S. Schafer- Nameki, Categorical landau paradigm for gapped phases (2023), arXiv:2310.03786 [cond-mat.str-el]

2023 arXiv
[47]

Bhardwaj and S

L. Bhardwaj and S. Schafer-Nameki, Generalized charges, part ii: Non-invertible symmetries and the symmetry tft (2023), arXiv:2305.17159 [hep-th]

2023
[48]

T. Lan, G. Yue, and L. Wang, Category of set orders (2024), arXiv:2312.15958 [cond-mat.str-el]

2024 arXiv
[49]

Ji and X.-G

W. Ji and X.-G. Wen, Categorical symmetry and non- invertible anomaly in symmetry-breaking and topolog- ical phase transitions, Physical Review Research 2, 10.1103/physrevresearch.2.033417 (2020)

2020 doi
[50]

Chatterjee and X.-G

A. Chatterjee and X.-G. Wen, Symmetry as a shadow of topological order and a derivation of topologi- cal holographic principle, Physical Review B 107, 10.1103/physrevb.107.155136 (2023)

2023 doi
[51]

Xu and Z.-H

R. Xu and Z.-H. Zhang, Categorical descriptions of one- dimensional gapped phases with abelian onsite symme- tries, Phys. Rev. B 110, 155106 (2024)

2024
[52]

Seifnashri and S.-H

S. Seifnashri and S.-H. Shao, Cluster state as a non-in- vertible symmetry protected topological phase (2024), arXiv:2404.01369 [cond-mat.str-el]

2024
[53]

Inamura, On lattice models of gapped phases with fusion category symmetries, Journal of High Energy Physics 2022, 10.1007/jhep03(2022)036 (2022)

K. Inamura, On lattice models of gapped phases with fusion category symmetries, Journal of High Energy Physics 2022, 10.1007/jhep03(2022)036 (2022)

2022 doi
[54]

Inamura and S

K. Inamura and S. Ohyama, 1+1d spt phases with fu- sion category symmetry: interface modes and non-a- belian thouless pump (2024), arXiv:2408.15960 [cond– mat.str-el]

2024
[55]

Molnar, A

A. Molnar, A. R. de Alarc´ on, J. Garre-Rubio, N. Schuch, J. I. Cirac, and D. P´ erez-Garc ´ ıa, Ma- trix product operator algebras i: representations of weak hopf algebras and projected entangled pair states (2022), arXiv:2204.05940 [quant-ph]

2022 arXiv
[56]

Jia, Weak hopf non-invertible symmetry-protected topological spin liquid and lattice realization of (1+1)d symmetry topological ﬁeld theory (2024), arXiv:2412.15336 [hep-th]

Z. Jia, Weak hopf non-invertible symmetry-protected topological spin liquid and lattice realization of (1+1)d symmetry topological ﬁeld theory (2024), arXiv:2412.15336 [hep-th]

2024
[57]

Z. Jia, Generalized cluster states from hopf algebras: non-invertible symmetry and hopf tensor network rep- resentation, Journal of High Energy Physics 2024, 10.1007/jhep09(2024)147 (2024)

2024 doi
[58]

Garre-Rubio, L

J. Garre-Rubio, L. Lootens, and A. Moln´ ar, Classify- ing phases protected by matrix product operator sym- metries using matrix product states, Quantum 7, 927 (2023)

2023
[59]

Jia, Quantum cluster state model with haagerup fusion category symmetry (2024), arXiv:2412.19657 [math.QA]

Z. Jia, Quantum cluster state model with haagerup fusion category symmetry (2024), arXiv:2412.19657 [math.QA]

2024
[60]

Davydov, L

A. Davydov, L. Kong, and I. Runkel, Field theories with defects and the centre functor (2011), arXiv:1107.0495 [math.QA]

2011 arXiv
[61]

L. Li, M. Oshikawa, and Y. Zheng, Noninvertible duality transformation between symmetry-protected topologi- cal and spontaneous symmetry breaking phases, Physi- cal Review B 108, 10.1103/physrevb.108.214429 (2023)

2023 doi
[62]

Lan and J.-R

T. Lan and J.-R. Zhou, Quantum current and holo- graphic categorical symmetry, SciPost Physics 16, 10.21468/scipostphys.16.2.053 (2024)

2024 doi
[63]

L. Chen, H. Zhang, K. Ji, C. Shen, R. Wang, X. Zeng, and L.-Y. Hung, Cftd from tqft D+1 via holographic ten- sor network, and precision discretisation of cft 2 (2024), arXiv:2210.12127 [hep-th]

2024 arXiv
[64]

Fukuma, S

M. Fukuma, S. Hosono, and H. Kawai, Lattice topolog- ical ﬁeld theory in two dimensions, Communications in Mathematical Physics 161, 157 (1994)

1994
[65]

A. D. LAUDA and H. PFEIFFER, State sum construc- tion of two-dimensional open-closed topological quan- tum ﬁeld theories, Journal of Knot Theory and Its Ram- iﬁcations 16, 1121–1163 (2007)

2007
[66]

Etingof and S

P. Etingof and S. Gelaki, Isocategorical groups (2000), arXiv:math/0007196 [math.QA]

2000 arXiv
[67]

The category HilbG will be used in the rest of the paper to emphasize unitarity
[68]

Tambara and S

D. Tambara and S. Yamagami, Tensor categories with fusion rules of self-duality for ﬁnite abelian groups, Jour- nal of Algebra 209, 692 (1998)

1998
[69]

Tambara, Representations of tensor categories with fusion rules of self-duality for abelian groups, Israel Journal of Mathematics 118, 29 (2000)

D. Tambara, Representations of tensor categories with fusion rules of self-duality for abelian groups, Israel Journal of Mathematics 118, 29 (2000)

2000
[70]

J. I. Cirac, D. P´ erez-Garc ´ ıa, N. Schuch, and F. Ver- straete, Matrix product states and projected entangled pair states: Concepts, symmetries, theorems, Reviews of Modern Physics 93, 10.1103/revmodphys.93.045003 (2021)

2021 doi
[71]

Kitaev and L

A. Kitaev and L. Kong, Models for gapped boundaries and domain walls, Communications in Mathematical Physics 313, 351–373 (2012)

2012
[72]

Seifnashri, Lieb-schultz-mattis anomalies as obstruc- tions to gauging (non-on-site) symmetries, SciPost Physics 16, 10.21468/scipostphys.16.4.098 (2024)

S. Seifnashri, Lieb-schultz-mattis anomalies as obstruc- tions to gauging (non-on-site) symmetries, SciPost Physics 16, 10.21468/scipostphys.16.4.098 (2024)

2024 doi
[73]

Strictly speaking, we should impose the constraint at the Hilbert space level and identify the gauge-invariant generators to recover the tensor product Hilbert space after gauging

Note that the Gauss law is a kinematic constraint. Strictly speaking, we should impose the constraint at the Hilbert space level and identify the gauge-invariant generators to recover the tensor product Hilbert space after gauging. Here for convenience, we impose the Gauss law...
[74]

Kong, Some universal properties of levin-wen models (2012), arXiv:1211.4644 [cond-mat.str-el]

L. Kong, Some universal properties of levin-wen models (2012), arXiv:1211.4644 [cond-mat.str-el]

2012 arXiv
[75]

Lan, Tube category, tensor renormalization and topo- logical holography (2024), arXiv:2412.07198 [math-ph]

T. Lan, Tube category, tensor renormalization and topo- logical holography (2024), arXiv:2412.07198 [math-ph]

2024 arXiv
[76]

Etingof, S

P. Etingof, S. Gelaki, D. Nikshych, and V. Ostrik, Ten- sor Categories , Mathematical surveys and monographs (American Mathematical Society, 2015)

2015
[77]

G. Bohm, F. Nill, and K. Szlachanyi, Weak hopf algebras i: Integral theory and c*-structure (1999), arXiv:math/9805116 [math.QA]

1999 arXiv
[78]

Nikshych and L

D. Nikshych and L. Vainerman, Finite quan- tum groupoids and their applications (2000), arXiv:math/0006057 [math.QA]

2000 arXiv
[79]

For simplicity, we omit the ordering “ ≤” label when there is no ambiguity
[80]

Couvreur, L

R. Couvreur, L. Lootens, and F. Verstraete, Matrix quantum groups as matrix product operator represen- tations of lie groups (2022), arXiv:2202.06937 [cond– mat.stat-mech]

2022 arXiv
[81]

Kapustin, N

A. Kapustin, N. Sopenko, and B. Yang, A classiﬁcation of invertible phases of bosonic quantum lattice systems in one dimension, Journal of Mathematical Physics 62, 10.1063/5.0055996 (2021)

2021 doi
[82]

Haag and D

R. Haag and D. Kastler, An Algebraic approach to quantum ﬁeld theory, J. Math. Phys. 5, 848 (1964)

1964
[83]

Bratteli and D

O. Bratteli and D. Robinson, Operator Algebras and 47 Quantum Statistical Mechanics , Operator Algebras and Quantum Statistical Mechanics No. volumn 2 (Springer, 1979)

1979
[84]

Bratteli and D

O. Bratteli and D. W. Robinson, Operator Algebras and Quantum Statistical Mechanics II , Theoretical and Mathematical Physics, Vol. 1 (Springer Berlin, Heidel- berg, 1981) pp. XI, 507, published: 17 April 2013. Part of the Springer Book Archive

1981
[85]

Alicki, M

R. Alicki, M. Fannes, and M. Horodecki, A statistical mechanics view on kitaev’s proposal for quantum mem- ories, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoret- ical 40, 6451–6467 (2007)

2007
[86]

unique ground state

Hereinafter, we do not distinguish between O-type and H-type ground states when referring to “unique ground state” associated with an SPT phase
[87]

The ﬁxed-point nature of the Q-system model ensures that the screening by any number of fgt A can be reduced to a single fgt A screening, thus it suﬃces for us to deﬁne the single fgt A screening
[88]

Evenbly and G

G. Evenbly and G. Vidal, Local scale transformations on the lattice with tensor network renormalization, Physi- cal Review Letters 116, 10.1103/physrevlett.116.040401 (2016)

2016 doi
[89]

Wei and Z.-C

Y.-J. Wei and Z.-C. Gu, Tensor network renormaliza- tion: application to dynamic correlation functions and non-hermitian systems (2023), arXiv:2311.18785 [cond– mat.str-el]

2023 arXiv
[90]

Groupprops Subwiki contributors, Projective represen- tation theory of dihedral group: D8 , Groupprops Sub- wiki (2011), last accessed: December 23, 2024

2011
[91]

Wen, 1+1d spt for non-invertible symme- try – a holographic point of view (2024), available at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RbZ_jDMJfZtwUuX8Ie1Htfdjcyp1nJ0C/view

X.-G. Wen, 1+1d spt for non-invertible symme- try – a holographic point of view (2024), available at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RbZ_jDMJfZtwUuX8Ie1Htfdjcyp1nJ0C/view

2024
[92]

Kong, X.-G

L. Kong, X.-G. Wen, and H. Zheng, Boundary-bulk rela- tion in topological orders, Nuclear Physics B 922, 62–76 (2017)

2017
[93]

Part of the result originated from a discussion with Con- ghuan Luo
[94]

Bhardwaj, K

L. Bhardwaj, K. Inamura, and A. Tiwari, Fermionic non-invertible symmetries in (1+1)d: Gapped and gap- less phases, transitions, and symmetry tfts (2024), arXiv:2405.09754 [hep-th]

2024 arXiv
[95]

R. Wen, W. Ye, and A. C. Potter, Topological holog- raphy for fermions (2024), arXiv:2404.19004 [cond– mat.str-el]

2024 arXiv
[96]

Inamura, Fermionization of fusion category symme- tries in 1+1 dimensions (2023), arXiv:2206.13159 [cond– mat.str-el]

K. Inamura, Fermionization of fusion category symme- tries in 1+1 dimensions (2023), arXiv:2206.13159 [cond– mat.str-el]

2023
[97]

L. Kong, W. Yuan, Z.-H. Zhang, and H. Zheng, En- riched monoidal categories i: Centers, Quantum Topol- ogy 10.4171/qt/217 (2024)

2024 doi
[98]

Kelly, Basic Concepts of Enriched Category Theory , Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol

G. Kelly, Basic Concepts of Enriched Category Theory , Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 64 (Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 1982) republished in: Reprints in Theory and Applications of Categories, No. 10 (2005), pp. 1–

2005
[99]

Fannes, B

M. Fannes, B. Nachtergaele, and R. F. Werner, Finitely correlated states on quantum spin chains, Communica- tions in Mathematical Physics 144, 443 (1992)

1992
[100]

Inamura and K

K. Inamura and K. Ohmori, Fusion surface models: 2+1d lattice models from fusion 2-categories, SciPost Physics 16, 10.21468/scipostphys.16.6.143 (2024)

2024 doi
[101]

Delcamp and A

C. Delcamp and A. Tiwari, Higher categorical symme- tries and gauging in two-dimensional spin systems, Sci- Post Physics 16, 10.21468/scipostphys.16.4.110 (2024)

2024 doi
[102]

C. L. Douglas and D. J. Reutter, Fusion 2-cate- gories and a state-sum invariant for 4-manifolds (2018), arXiv:1812.11933 [math.QA]

2018 arXiv
[103]

Feiguin, S

A. Feiguin, S. Trebst, A. W. W. Ludwig, M. Troyer, A. Kitaev, Z. Wang, and M. H. Freedman, Interact- ing anyons in topological quantum liquids: The golden chain, Physical Review Letters 98, 10.1103/phys- revlett.98.160409 (2007)

2007 doi
[104]

Kong and H

L. Kong and H. Zheng, A mathematical theory of gap- less edges of 2d topological orders. part i, Journal of High Energy Physics 2020, 10.1007/jhep02(2020)150 (2020)

2020 doi
[105]

Kong and H

L. Kong and H. Zheng, A mathematical theory of gap- less edges of 2d topological orders. part ii, Nuclear Physics B 966, 115384 (2021)

2021
[106]

Warman, F

A. Warman, F. Yang, A. Tiwari, H. Pichler, and S. Schafer-Nameki, Categorical symmetries in spin mod- els with atom arrays (2024), arXiv:2412.15024 [cond– mat.str-el]

2024
[107]

Tantivasadakarn, R

N. Tantivasadakarn, R. Thorngren, A. Vishwanath, and R. Verresen, Long-range entanglement from measuring symmetry-protected topological phases, Physical Re- view X 14, 10.1103/physrevx.14.021040 (2024)

2024 doi
[108]

Perez-Garcia, F

D. Perez-Garcia, F. Verstraete, M. M. Wolf, and J. I. Cirac, Matrix product state representations (2007), arXiv:quant-ph/0608197 [quant-ph]

2007 arXiv
[109]

Penneys, Hilbert spaces , Lecture Notes for Math 8110, Higher Linear Algebra (2023), accessed: 2024-11- 04

D. Penneys, Hilbert spaces , Lecture Notes for Math 8110, Higher Linear Algebra (2023), accessed: 2024-11- 04

2023
[110]

Vaes and A

S. Vaes and A. V. Daele, Hopf c*-algebras (1999), arXiv:math/9907030 [math.OA]

1999 arXiv
[111]

Q. Chen, R. H. Palomares, C. Jones, and D. Pen- neys, Q-system completion for c* 2-categories (2024), arXiv:2105.12010 [math.OA]

2024
[112]

Longo and J

R. Longo and J. E. Roberts, A theory of dimension, K-Theory 11, 103 (1997)

1997
[113]

P. A. Zito, 2-c*-categories with non-simple units (2005), arXiv:math/0509266 [math.CT]

2005 arXiv
[114]

Bischoﬀ, Y

M. Bischoﬀ, Y. Kawahigashi, R. Longo, and K.-H. Rehren, Tensor categories and endomorphisms of von Neumann algebras—with applications to quantum ﬁeld theory , SpringerBriefs in Mathematical Physics, Vol. 3 (Springer, Cham, 2015) pp. x+94

2015
[115]

Penneys, Unitary dual functors for unitary multiten- sor categories (2018), arXiv:1808.00323 [math.QA]

D. Penneys, Unitary dual functors for unitary multiten- sor categories (2018), arXiv:1808.00323 [math.QA]

2018 arXiv
[116]

Kong and H

L. Kong and H. Zheng, Semisimple and separable alge- bras in multi-fusion categories (2019), arXiv:1706.06904 [math.QA]

2019 arXiv
[118]

Kong and Z.-H

L. Kong and Z.-H. Zhang, An invitation to topologi- cal orders and category theory (2022), arXiv:2205.05565 [cond-mat.str-el]

2022 arXiv
[119]

B. Shi, K. Kato, and I. H. Kim, Fusion rules from en- tanglement, Annals of Physics 418, 168164 (2020)

2020
[120]

Shi and I

B. Shi and I. H. Kim, Entanglement bootstrap ap- proach for gapped domain walls, Physical Review B 103, 10.1103/physrevb.103.115150 (2021)

2021 doi
[121]

The total algebra in the thermodynamic limit is then the in- ductive limit of this inductive net

An ideal formulation of the thermodynamic limit re- quires specifying embedding maps between the C ⋆- algebras for diﬀerent L values, so that models with vary- ing numbers of sites can be meaningfully compared. The total algebra in the thermodynamic limit is then the in- ducti...
[122]

Still, for a ﬁxed L there exist energy gaps Ei,L between the ground state and several excitation states labeled by i, such that limL→∞ Ei,L = 0 for all i

Note that for a non-ﬁxed-point model, the ground state is generically not exactly degenerate. Still, for a ﬁxed L there exist energy gaps Ei,L between the ground state and several excitation states labeled by i, such that limL→∞ Ei,L = 0 for all i. In this case, an error is ne...
[123]

Nachtergaele and R

B. Nachtergaele and R. Sims, Lieb-robinson bounds in quantum many-body physics (2010), arXiv:1004.2086 [math-ph]

2010 arXiv
[124]

Levin, Real space rg and the emergence of topo- logical order (2007), presented at IPAM’s Topological Quantum Computing workshop, 2007

M. Levin, Real space rg and the emergence of topo- logical order (2007), presented at IPAM’s Topological Quantum Computing workshop, 2007

2007
[125]

Ostrik, Module categories over the drinfeld double of a ﬁnite group (2006), arXiv:math/0202130 [math.QA]

V. Ostrik, Module categories over the drinfeld double of a ﬁnite group (2006), arXiv:math/0202130 [math.QA]

2006 arXiv
[126]

Kitaev, Almost-idempotent quantum channels and approximate c∗ -algebras (2024), arXiv:2405.02434 [math.OA]

A. Kitaev, Almost-idempotent quantum channels and approximate c∗ -algebras (2024), arXiv:2405.02434 [math.OA]

2024 arXiv
[136]

Revision for typographical errors posted 2023-12- 13

2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [35]

Y. Choi, H. T. Lam, and S.-H. Shao, Non-invert- ible global symmetries in the standard model (2022), arXiv:2205.05086 [hep-th]

arXiv 2022

[2] [1]

fgt(A) is a matrix algebra, or equivalently dimZ(fgt(A)) = 1

A(C∨ Hilbf )A∼ =C∨ Hilbh ;2. fgt(A) is a matrix algebra, or equivalently dimZ(fgt(A)) = 1. Proof. Let the linear dual of W be W ∗, and W ∗⊗− is automatically a left and right adjoint to W⊗− as linear functors Hilb → Hilb. We want to show that such adjointness lifts to C-module functors. Suppose W⊗− equipped with natural isomorphisms βc⊗ id− : W⊗ f (c)⊗− ∼...

[3] [2]

All the G-SPT phases and three Rep†(D8) SPTs belong to this case; 2.C∨ Hilbf ⁄∼ =C∨ Hilbh , where h and f are not related by monoidal equivalences

h = fπ induces a monoidal equivalence C∨ Hilbf ∼ = C∨ Hilbh and (C,f ) and ( C,fπ ) are not necessarily phase-equivalent. All the G-SPT phases and three Rep†(D8) SPTs belong to this case; 2.C∨ Hilbf ⁄∼ =C∨ Hilbh , where h and f are not related by monoidal equivalences. By Theorem VI.2, there exists an algebra A inC∨ Hilbf such that A(C∨ Hilbf )A∼ = C∨ Hil...

[4] [3]

It is possible that when f andh are not related by monoidal equivalences, it happens to be C∨ Hilbf ∼ =C∨ Hilbh

There might be a situation landing in the middle of 1 and 2. It is possible that when f andh are not related by monoidal equivalences, it happens to be C∨ Hilbf ∼ =C∨ Hilbh . It remains unclear what physical observables detect such an exotic case. In general, the charge category of a fusion category symmetry is not unique, as discussed in scenario 2. C = ...

2023

[5] [4]

Let (A,m,ι ) be a simple Q-system in C∨ Hilbf

Deformation In this section, we show that a Q-system model ( Z, H,A,−m†m) can be deformed into another smaller one (Z, H,AP,−m† PmP ) constructed from the reduced Q-system ( AP,mP,ιP ) without causing phase transition. Let (A,m,ι ) be a simple Q-system in C∨ Hilbf . Deﬁne the parameterized multiplication: m(f ) := f . 40 where f∈C ∨ Hilbf (1,A ). Since A ...

[6] [5]

equivalence classes of ﬁnite tensor categories C with a ﬁber functor F , up to tensor equivalence and isomorphism of tensor functors, and

[7] [6]

32 Appendix D: Algebra Deﬁnition D.1

isomorphism classes of ﬁnite-dimensional Hopf algebras. 32 Appendix D: Algebra Deﬁnition D.1. (Algebra) Let C be a monoidal category. An (associative unital) algebra in C is a triple ( A,m,ι ), consisting of an object A∈C together with a multiplication m :A⊗A→A and a unit morphism ι : 1→A satisfying associativity and identity: (A⊗A)⊗A A ⊗ (A⊗A) A⊗A A ⊗A A...

[8] [7]

There exists a ⋆-homomorphism A≃ ⊕n i=1Mai , where each summand has the usual conjugate transpose †- operation