Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

The 3BF theory as a TQFT

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that the 3BF boundary state sum defines a functor from triangulated 3-cobordisms to Hilbert spaces, hence a TQFT, with all axioms verified for finite 3-groups.

desk verdict A substantial state-sum construction for 3-group gauge theory on triangulated 4-manifolds with boundary, but the identity axiom is not proved: the cylinder operator projects onto flat boundary colorings, so Theorem 3.1 fails as stated. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.21032 v2 pith:QWHDLIHK submitted 2024-12-30 hep-th gr-qcmath-phmath.MP

Tijana Radenkovic , Marko Vojinovic This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thgr-qcmath-phmath.MP MSC 81T4557R56
keywords topologicalquantumfieldtheory3BFhighergauge3-group2-crossedmodulestatesumspinfoamquantizationPachnermoves
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

The paper aims to complete the construction of a topological quantum field theory from the 3BF action, a higher-gauge theory whose classical form describes general relativity coupled to Standard Model matter once simplicity constraints are added. Its central claim is that a discretized path integral, written as a state sum over triangulated 4-manifolds with boundary, is a topological invariant of the manifold and defines a functor from the category of triangulated 3-cobordisms to the category of Hilbert spaces, satisfying every TQFT axiom. If correct, this gives the first explicit TQFT built from a 3-group, realizes a previously proposed general TQFT framework based on homotopy n-types, and completes step 2 of the spinfoam quantization programme, leaving the imposition of simplicity constraints as the next obstacle to a quantum-gravity path integral. The rigorous construction is carried out only for finite groups; extension to Lie groups or to quantum groups is explicitly left open.

What carries the argument

The central object is the boundary state sum Z∂ from equation (29), a discretized path integral over a triangulation of a 4-manifold with boundary in which edges, triangles, and tetrahedra carry elements of the groups G, H, L of a 2-crossed module, and products of Dirac deltas enforce flatness of the 3-connection on each simplex. The Hilbert space assigned to a triangulated boundary is the space of square-integrable functions on boundary colorings, and the cobordism operator is defined by integrating the kernel Z∂ against incoming and outgoing boundary states. The domain category 3TCob has triangulated 3-manifolds as objects and 4-manifolds as morphisms where the bulk triangulation is quotiented out; the triangulation independence required by that quotient is supposed to follow from invariance of Z∂ under Pachner moves that keep the boundary fixed.

What would settle it

Take a 4-ball with a fixed triangulation of its boundary 3-sphere, compute Z∂ using two different bulk triangulations related by a 4-dimensional Pachner move that does not touch the boundary (for a small finite 3-group, such as one whose groups G, H, L are all cyclic), and compare the resulting functions on boundary colorings; any difference would show the functor is not well defined.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper constructs a boundary state sum Z∂ for a compact triangulated 4-manifold M with boundary Σ, colored by elements of a finite 3-group encoded as a 2-crossed module L→H→G. The sum integrates only over bulk colorings, so Z∂ is a function of the group elements living on the boundary. The proposed functor sends a triangulated boundary to the Hilbert space H = L2(G|Λ1,Σ| × H|Λ2,Σ| × L|Λ3,Σ|) and sends a 4-dimensional cobordism to the operator whose kernel is Z∂. The paper then proves functoriality under gluing, identity preservation, tensor multiplicativity, normalization on the empty manifold, compatibility with orientation reversal and adjoints, and the unit-counit identities, establishing Theorem 3.1: Z is a functor between dagger symmetric monoidal categories with a dual, and therefore a TQFT. A derived functor from ordinary 3Cob to Hilb is also constructed using a minimal triangulation of each boundary manifold.

Load-bearing premise

The state sum Z∂ must be unchanged when the bulk triangulation is refined or reorganized by Pachner moves while the boundary triangulation stays fixed, since otherwise a single cobordism would define many different operators.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For every finite 3-group, the construction gives a TQFT-type invariant of triangulated 4-manifolds with boundary, assigning a finite-dimensional Hilbert space to each boundary and a linear operator to each cobordism.
  • Gluing two cobordisms along a common triangulated boundary corresponds exactly to composing operators, with the 1/dim H factor in the gluing formula matching the state-sum identity.
  • The closed-manifold state sum from the authors' previous work is recovered when the boundary is empty, embedding that invariant as the partition function of a full TQFT.
  • The induced functor from ordinary cobordisms to Hilbert spaces makes the topological quantities independent of the bulk triangulation, provided the minimal-triangulation prescription is accepted.
  • The result completes the discrete-path-integral step of the spinfoam programme for 3BF gravity with matter, so the remaining step is to impose simplicity constraints and break topological invariance toward a physical theory.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper: if boundary-preserving Pachner invariance is proven directly rather than asserted, the same state sum would give an explicit algorithmic invariant of 4-manifolds with boundary, computable for small triangulations and small finite groups, which could be tested numerically.
  • Beyond the paper: the finite-group restriction suggests a possible route to physical theories via a root-of-unity quantum-group deformation of the 3-group structure, analogous to the regularized Turaev-Viro construction, though no quantum 3-group (and no limit from finite approximations of Lie groups) is yet available.
  • Beyond the paper: different 3-groups should produce different TQFT functors of this form, so comparing their partition functions on standard manifolds could help identify which 3-group structure best matches gravity coupled to Standard Model matter once simplicity constraints are imposed.
  • Beyond the paper: one could extract new invariants of closed 3-manifolds by taking closed 3-dimensional boundaries and evaluating the boundary Hilbert-space dimension or special matrix elements, a direction the paper does not explore.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper constructs a state sum Z∂ for triangulated 4-manifolds with boundary, extending the closed-manifold invariant of [26] to the case of a finite 3-group (L→H→G with 2-crossed module structure). It uses Z∂ to define a map Z on the category 3T Cob of triangulated 3-manifolds and cobordisms, assigning to each boundary the Hilbert space of square-integrable functions on all boundary group colorings (Eq. (31)) and to each cobordism an integral operator with kernel Z∂ (Eq. (33)). The central claim (Theorem 3.1) is that Z is a functor between dagger symmetric monoidal categories with dual, hence a TQFT satisfying all Atiyah axioms. The paper also sketches an induced functor \tilde Z from 3Cob to Hilb via a choice of minimal triangulation (Section 3.4).

Significance. If the main theorem were established, the paper would provide an explicit state-sum TQFT in dimension 4 from 3-group data, realizing Porter's construction and constituting a significant step in the spinfoam quantization programme for 3BF theories. The paper is self-contained in its category theory review and contains extensive algebraic appendices (Lemmas B.1–B.3) checking orientation-reversal identities in the 2-crossed module calculus; this is a substantial and useful piece of algebra. However, the central claim is not currently established: the identity axiom fails for the Hilbert space assignment (31), and the boundary-fixed Pachner invariance of Z∂ is asserted rather than proved. These are load-bearing issues, so the paper requires substantial revision rather than minor polishing.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 4.2, Eqs. (29), (31), (33)] The identity axiom (Axiom 4 of Definition 2.9) is not satisfied by the map defined in (31) and (33). The kernel Z∂ in (29) contains boundary delta functions ∏_{(jkℓ)∈Λ2,Σ} δ_G(g_{jkℓ}) and ∏_{(jkℓm)∈Λ3,Σ} δ_H(h_{jkℓm}). Consequently every operator Z(M) annihilates any boundary coloring that does not satisfy these flatness constraints. In particular, for the cylinder id_{T(Σ)} = [0,1]×T(Σ), the operator \hat N = Z(id) is the projector onto the subspace of flat boundary colorings, not the identity operator on the full Hilbert space H = L²(G^{|Λ1,Σ|} × H^{|Λ2,Σ|} × L^{|Λ3,Σ|}) defined in (31). The proof in Section 4.2 assumes without proof that ker \hat N is trivial and argues that the common kernel of all operators 'should be trivial'; this is false because all non-flat boundary colorings lie in the kernel of every Z(M). The proposed fallback, redefining Z(T(Σ)) = im(\hat N), changes the object assignment (31) and is not carried out; the multiplicativity, normalization, dual, and unit/counit axioms would need to be re-verified on the redefined Hilbert spaces. Therefore Theorem 3.1 is not established as stated.
  2. [Section 3.1, after Eq. (30)] The invariance of Z∂ under 4-dimensional Pachner moves that keep the boundary triangulation fixed is asserted without proof ('it is straightforward to show'). This invariance is load-bearing: the operator Z(M) in (33) is defined using an arbitrary bulk triangulation compatible with the fixed boundary triangulation, and the category 3T Cob identifies morphisms that differ by such bulk triangulations. Without this invariance, Z is not well-defined, and the functoriality axiom (15) and the induced functor \tilde Z of Section 3.4 are not justified. The closed-manifold proof in [26] does not automatically cover the boundary-fixed case, because the boundary delta functions and the modified exponent factors in (29) must be checked to be unchanged under each Pachner move. The authors should either supply this proof or state the invariance as an additional assumption.
  3. [Section 4.6] The proof of the involutory axiom (23) is not a proof. The text shows that Z(T(Σ)) and Z(T(Σ¯)) are isomorphic as Hilbert spaces and states that 'nothing prevents us from making an identification,' but a functor requires a specific assignment of dual objects. The paper does not define the isomorphism between Z(T(Σ¯)) and Z(T(Σ))*, nor does it verify compatibility with the dagger structure and with the unit/counit maps used in Section 4.8. As written, Axiom 9 (dual—involution) remains unproved.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 4.2] The sentence 'assuming that the kernel of \hat N is trivial in the space H = Z(T(Σ))' is circular with respect to the identity axiom, since triviality of ker \hat N is exactly what needs to be proved. The subsequent claim that the common kernel 'should be trivial' is not a mathematical argument and is in fact false, as noted in Major Comment 1.
  2. [Section 3.4] The construction of \tilde Z depends on an arbitrary choice of ordering of the 4-tuples of simplex counts, as the authors acknowledge. The text should clarify whether \tilde Z is intended as a canonical TQFT or as one member of a family of functors parametrized by such choices; in particular, the statement 'which is obviously a functor, since Z is a functor' is too quick, because the identity axiom for Z is already in question.
  3. [Eq. (29)] For a cobordism whose boundary has an odd number of vertices (e.g., a cobordism from the empty manifold to a 3-manifold with five boundary vertices), the exponents in (29) involve half-integer powers of |G|, |H|, and |L|. The paper does not discuss this; while a positive square root is well-defined for finite groups, the dependence on this choice and the consistency with the rest of the normalization should be addressed.
  4. [Section 4.8] Equation (65) asserts that Z^id_∂, Z^η_∂, and Z^ϵ_∂ are equal because the three cobordisms are 'described by the same manifold M.' This is not trivial, since the state sum (29) depends on the decomposition of the boundary into incoming and outgoing components and on the orientation of the boundary triangulation. The equality should be demonstrated explicitly or replaced by a more careful argument.
  5. [General] There are numerous typographical issues, including 'the the' in the Introduction, missing spaces in '3T Cob' and 'M orC', and an incorrect 'M2' instead of 'MB' in Definition 2.9, item 3. A careful proofreading pass is recommended.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Identity axiom is made true by assumption or by redefining the Hilbert space as im(N); otherwise the state-sum derivation is direct.

  1. self definitional [Section 4.2, identity morphism axiom proof (equation (16)), including the fallback paragraph after 'Regarding the assumption of the triviality of the kernel']
    "Then, assuming that the kernel of ˆN is trivial in the space H = Z(T (Σ)), elementary linear algebra gives us ˆN = ˆIH, demonstrating that equation (16) is satisfied. ... In the unlikely case that it is not trivial, ... one could in principle redefine the functor Z so that the Hilbert space H = Z(T (Σ)) is not given by (31), but is instead equal to the image of ˆN, ... With this redefinition, the kernel of ˆN becomes trivial, giving us again the result ˆN = ˆIH and demonstrating that equation (16) is satisfied."

    The target property Z(id)=IH is not derived from the state sum (29)/(33); it is imposed. The proof starts by assuming the very condition needed (trivial kernel of N) and, in the admitted failure case, redefines the object assignment H to be im(N), so the identity axiom becomes true by construction. Since the kernel (29) contains boundary flatness delta functions, the image of every operator lies in the flat subspace, so non-flat boundary colorings generically lie in the common kernel; the assumption is not established. The redefinition changes the object assignment (31) used in Theorem 3.1 and would require re-verifying axioms 1, 3, 5-10 for the new Hilbert space. As written, the stated map (29), (31), (33) is not proved to satisfy Axiom 4.

full rationale

The central state sum Z∂ is an explicit formula, and the functoriality, multiplicativity, normalization, Hermitian, and unit/counit arguments are direct computations from that formula rather than fitted parameters or renamed inputs. The dependence on the authors' previous work [26] for closed-manifold Pachner invariance is a self-citation, but [26] is a separate published computation, so it is not by itself a circular reduction. However, the boundary-fixed Pachner invariance is asserted as 'straightforward' in Section 3.1 after equation (30) rather than proved; this is a load-bearing gap, though not a circular step. The genuine circular move is in Section 4.2: the identity axiom is obtained either by assuming the desired triviality of the kernel of N, or by redefining the object Hilbert space to be im(N), which makes the axiom true by definition rather than by evaluating Z on the cylinder. Because boundary flatness constraints in (29) give a nontrivial common kernel, the theorem as stated is not established. Score 6 reflects that one central axiom is forced by redefinition while the rest of the derivation is self-contained.

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

The construction rests on standard higher gauge theory data (2-crossed modules), finite group assumptions, triangulability, and the unproved bulk-invariance property carried over from [26]. No numerical parameters are fitted to data; the only arbitrary choice is the ordering used to define minimal triangulations for the secondary functor tilde Z.

free parameters (1)
  • Minimal triangulation ordering = lexicographic (chosen, not unique)
    Section 3.4 chooses lexicographic ordering to define Tm(Σ); alternative orderings define different tilde Z functors. This does not affect the central functor Z.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption G, H, L with 2-crossed module structure form a semistrict 3-group.
    Section 3.1 and Appendix A define all state sum data in terms of this structure; no independent evidence is given beyond the axioms.
  • domain assumption G, H, L are finite groups.
    Proofs of functoriality use delta(g)^2 = |G| delta(g) and finite sums; Section 5 states rigorous results hold only for finite groups.
  • domain assumption The 4-manifold admits a triangulation compatible with the boundary triangulation.
    Section 3.1 and Section 5 restrict to triangulable manifolds; E8 is excluded.
  • ad hoc to paper Z∂ is invariant under bulk Pachner moves that leave the boundary triangulation fixed.
    Asserted in Section 3.1 after Eq. (30) as 'straightforward' from [26]; not proved here, yet needed for Z(M) to be independent of bulk triangulation.
  • standard math Pachner moves relate any two triangulations of PL-equivalent manifolds.
    Used implicitly to claim triangulation independence; standard result of PL topology.
  • standard math Finite-dimensional Hilbert spaces identify with their duals via Riesz representation.
    Involution axiom and dual structure rely on H** = H for finite-dimensional spaces.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The 3BF theory as a TQFT." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QWHDLIHK

@misc{pith2026241221032,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The 3BF theory as a TQFT},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QWHDLIHK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.21032}
}
read the original abstract

We study the path integral quantization of the topological 3BF theory, whose gauge symmetry is described by a 3-group. This theory is relevant for the quantization of general relativity coupled to Standard Model of elementary particles. We explicitly construct a state sum corresponding to the discretized path integral of a 3BF action. Being a topological invariant of 4-dimensional manifolds with boundary, this state sum gives rise to a topological quantum field theory (TQFT), realized as a functor between the category of cobordisms and the category of Hilbert spaces. After an introduction to appropriate category theory concepts and the construction of the state sum, we provide an explicit proof that it satisfies all Atiyah's axioms, and thus represents a genuine TQFT. The formulation of this TQFT represents a major step in the spinfoam quantization programme for a realistic theory of quantum gravity with matter.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.21032 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The oriented 4-dimensional manifold M : Σ1 → Σ2 with the boundary ∂M = Σ¯ 1 ⊔ Σ2. • The composition of morphisms is defined by the connected sum — gluing of manifolds along a common boundary. For any two 4-dimensional manifolds MA ∈ Mor3Cob(Σ1, Σ) and MB ∈ Mor3Cob(Σ, Σ2) that are composable, i.e. , that satisfy t(MA) = s(MB), the composition MB#MA ∈ Mor3Cob(Σ1, Σ2) is the connected sum of MA and MB along the 3-dimen… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The composition of cobordisms MB#MA. • For each object, a 3-dimensional manifold Σ, there exists an identity morphism idΣ ∈ Mor3Cob(Σ, Σ) given by a 4-dimensional cylinder [0, 1] × Σ with the boundary ∂([0, 1] × Σ) = Σ¯ ⊔ Σ, as shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The identity cobordism, the unit map and the counit map. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The cobordism M : ∅ → T (Σ). 17 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_4.png]

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. A 3BF model of quantum gravity coupled to Standard Model matter

    hep-th 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A 3BF higher-gauge model of quantum gravity with the full Standard Model is discretized on a piecewise-flat manifold, yielding a concrete path integral.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [26]

    Topological invariant of 4-manifolds based on a 3-group

    T. Radenkovi´c and M. V ojinovi´c, Topological invariant of 4-manifolds based on a 3-group, J. High Energy Phys. 07, 105 (2022), arxiv:2201.02572

    work page Pith review arXiv 2022

  2. [1]

    Becker, M

    K. Becker, M. Becker, and J. Schwarz, String Theory and M-Theory: A Modern Introduction , Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2006)

    work page 2006

  3. [2]

    Zwiebach, A First Course in String Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2004)

    B. Zwiebach, A First Course in String Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2004)

    work page 2004

  4. [3]

    Polchinski, String theory - Volume II, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1998)

    J. Polchinski, String theory - Volume II, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1998)

    work page 1998

  5. [4]

    Ashtekar, New variables for classical and quantum gravity, Phys

    A. Ashtekar, New variables for classical and quantum gravity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 2244-2247 (1986)

    work page 1986

  6. [5]

    Thiemann, Modern Canonical Quantum General Relativity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2007)

    T. Thiemann, Modern Canonical Quantum General Relativity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2007)

    work page 2007

  7. [6]

    Rovelli, Quantum Gravity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2004)

    C. Rovelli, Quantum Gravity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2004)

    work page 2004

  8. [7]

    Rovelli and F

    C. Rovelli and F. Vidotto, Covariant Loop Quantum Gravity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2014)

    work page 2014

Show all 41 references
  1. [8]

    Rovelli, Zakopane lectures on loop gravity, arxiv:1102.3660

    C. Rovelli, Zakopane lectures on loop gravity, arxiv:1102.3660

    arXiv

  2. [9]

    D. N. Yetter, Triangulations and TQFT’s, Quantum Topology, 354-369, (1993)

    1993

  3. [10]

    Ponzano and T

    G. Ponzano and T. Regge, Semiclassical limit of Racah coefficients, in Spectroscopic and Group Theoretical Methods in Physics: Racah Memorial Volume, edited by F. Bloch, North Holland, Amsterdam (1968)

    1968

  4. [11]

    Baez, 4-Dimensional BF Theory as a Topological Quantum Field Theory, Lett.Math.Phys

    J. Baez, 4-Dimensional BF Theory as a Topological Quantum Field Theory, Lett.Math.Phys. 38, 129-143 (1996), arxiv:q-alg/9507006

    1996 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Girelli, H

    F. Girelli, H. Pfeiffer and E. M. Popescu,Topological Higher Gauge Theory - from BF to BFCG theory, Jour. Math. Phys. 49, 032503 (2008), arxiv:0708.3051

    2008 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Witten, Topological quantum field theory, Comm

    E. Witten, Topological quantum field theory, Comm. Math. Phys. 117 (3), 353-386 (1988), MR 0953828

    1988

  7. [14]

    Witten, Quantum field theory and the Jones polynomial, Comm

    E. Witten, Quantum field theory and the Jones polynomial, Comm. Math. Phys. 121 (3), 351-399 (1989), MR 0990772

    1989

  8. [15]

    Cordes, G

    S. Cordes, G. Moore, and S. Ramgoolam, Lectures on 2D Yang-Mills Theory, Equivariant Cohomology and Topological Field Theories, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 41, 184-244 (1995), arxiv:hep-th/9411210

    1995 arXiv

  9. [16]

    Quinn, Lectures on axiomatic topological quantum field theory, in Geometry and Quantum Field Theory, eds

    F. Quinn, Lectures on axiomatic topological quantum field theory, in Geometry and Quantum Field Theory, eds. D.S. Freed and K. K. Uhlenbeck, IAS/Park City Mathematical Series, University of Texas, Austin: American Mathematical Society, 325-453 (1995)

    1995

  10. [17]

    Sozer and A

    K. Sozer and A. Virelizier, 3d TQFTs and 3-manifold invariants, in Encyclopedia of Mathematical Physics 2nd ed, Elsevier (2024)

    2024

  11. [18]

    Crane, L

    L. Crane, L. Kauffman, and D. Yetter, State-Sum invariants of 4-manifolds I, J. Knot Theory Ramifications 6 (2), 177-234 (1997), arxiv:hep-th/9409167

    1997 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Baez and J

    J. Baez and J. Dolan, Higher dimensional algebra and Topological Quantum Field Theory, J.Math.Phys. 36 6073-6105 (1995), arxiv:q-alg/9503002

    1995 arXiv

  13. [20]

    M. F. Atiyah, Topological Quantum Field Theory, Publications Mathématiques de l’IHÉS 68, 175-186 (1988), MR 1001453

    1988

  14. [21]

    Baez, Higher-Dimensional Algebra and Planck-Scale Physics, Physics Meets Philosophy at the Planck Length, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 177-195 (2001), arxiv:gr-qc/9902017

    J. Baez, Higher-Dimensional Algebra and Planck-Scale Physics, Physics Meets Philosophy at the Planck Length, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 177-195 (2001), arxiv:gr-qc/9902017

    2001 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Baez and J

    J. Baez and J. Huerta, An Invitation to Higher Gauge Theory , Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 43, 2335 (2011), arxiv:1003.4485

    2011 arXiv

  16. [23]

    Radenkovi´c and M

    T. Radenkovi´c and M. V ojinovi´c, Higher Gauge Theories Based on 3-groups, J. High Energy Phys. 10, 222 (2019), arxiv:1904.07566

    2019 arXiv

  17. [24]

    Stipsi´c and M

    P. Stipsi´c and M. V ojinovi´c, Symmetry breaking mechanisms of the 3BF action for the Standard Model coupled to gravity, Jour. Phys. A: Math. Theor.58, 215201 (2025), arxiv:2402.17675

    2025 arXiv

  18. [25]

    Mikovi ´c and M

    A. Mikovi ´c and M. V ojinovi ´c, Standard Model and 4-groups , Europhys. Lett. 133, 61001 (2021), arxiv:2008.06354. 49

    2021 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Porter, Topological quantum field theories from homotopy n-types, J

    T. Porter, Topological quantum field theories from homotopy n-types, J. London Math. Soc. (2) 58, No.3 (1998) 723–732, MR 1678163

    1998

  20. [28]

    Porter, Interpretations of Yetter’s notion ofG-coloring: simplicial fibre bundles and non-abelian cohomology, J

    T. Porter, Interpretations of Yetter’s notion ofG-coloring: simplicial fibre bundles and non-abelian cohomology, J. Knot Th. Ramif. 5, No. 5 (1996) 687–720, MR 1414095

    1996

  21. [29]

    Pachner, PL homeomorphic manifolds are equivalent by elementary shellings, Europ

    U. Pachner, PL homeomorphic manifolds are equivalent by elementary shellings, Europ. J. Combinat. 12, No. 2 (1991) 129–145, MR 1095161

    1991

  22. [30]

    D. N. Yetter, Topological quantum field theories associated to finite groups and crossed G-sets, J. Knot Theory Ramifications 1, 1 (1992)

    1992

  23. [31]

    D. N. Yetter, TQFT’s from homotopy 2-types, J. Knot Theory Ramifications 2, 113 (1993)

    1993

  24. [32]

    Timothy Porter, The Crossed Menagerie: an introduction to crossed gadgetry and cohomology in algebra and topology, Notes initially prepared for the XVI Encuentro Rioplatense de Algebra y Geometrıa Algebraica, (2006), https://ncatlab.org/timporter/files/HQFT-XMenageriev2.pdf

    2006

  25. [33]

    Mikovi ´c and M

    A. Mikovi ´c and M. V ojinovi´c, Poincaré 2-group and quantum gravity, Class. Quant. Grav. 29, 165003 (2012), arxiv:1110.4694

    2012 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Mikovi´c and M

    A. Mikovi´c and M. V ojinovi´c, Effective action and semi-classical limit of spin-foam models, Class. Quant. Grav. 28, 225004 (2011), arxiv:1104.1384

    2011 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Mikovi ´c and M

    A. Mikovi ´c and M. V ojinovi´c, State-Sum Models of Piecewise Linear Quantum Gravity , World Scientific, Singapore (2023)

    2023

  28. [36]

    Radenkovi´c and M

    T. Radenkovi´c and M. V ojinovi´c, Hamiltonian Analysis for the Scalar Electrodynamics as3BF Theory, Symmetry 12, 620 (2020), arxiv:2004.06901

    2020 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Radenkovi´c and M

    T. Radenkovi´c and M. V ojinovi´c, Gauge symmetry of the 3BF theory for a generic Lie 3-group, Class. Quantum Grav. 39, 135009 (2022), arxiv:2101.04049

    2022 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Conduché, Modules croisés généralisés de longueur 2, Proceedings of the Luminy conference on algebraic K-theory (Luminy, 1983), J

    D. Conduché, Modules croisés généralisés de longueur 2, Proceedings of the Luminy conference on algebraic K-theory (Luminy, 1983), J. PureAppl. Algebra 34 no. 2-3, 155–178, (1984)

    1984

  31. [39]

    J. F. Martins and R. Picken, The fundamental Gray 3-groupoid of a smooth manifold and local 3-dimensional holonomy based on a 2-crossed module, Differ. Geom. Appl. Journal29, 179-206 (2011), arxiv:0907.2566

    2011 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Wang,On 3-gauge transformations, 3-curvatures and Gray-categories, Jour

    W. Wang,On 3-gauge transformations, 3-curvatures and Gray-categories, Jour. Math. Phys.55 (4), 043506 (2014)

    2014

  33. [41]

    V . G. Turaev and O. Y . Viro,State sum invariants of 3-manifolds and quantum 6j-symbols, Topology 31, 865-902 (1992). 50

    1992

Pith tools

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