Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

3d $\mathcal{N}=4$ Mirror Symmetry, TQFTs, and 't Hooft Anomaly Matching

T0 review · 4 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 argues that the universal mass deformation drives every 3d $\mathcal{N}=4$ Abelian gauge theory to an Abelian spin TQFT, proves mirror symmetry descends to a duality of these TQFTs, and uses anomaly matching to connect abstract…

desk verdict Solid conditional paper: the TQFT duality proof is real and reusable, but the UV-to-SCFT bridge is an unproven assumption the authors flag themselves. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.21066 v1 pith:SKAWPF2U submitted 2024-12-30 hep-th cond-mat.str-elquant-ph

Mahesh K. N. Balasubramanian , Anindya Banerjee , Matthew Buican , Zhihao Duan , Andrea E. V. Ferrari , Hongliang Jiang This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thcond-mat.str-elquant-ph MSC 81T6081T4581T13
keywords 3dN=4supersymmetrymirrorsymmetryuniversalmassdeformationspinTQFTChern-Simonstheory'tHooftanomalymatchingfractionalizationlevel-rankduality
topics Yang-Mills Mass Gap
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 shows that a relevant, supersymmetry-preserving deformation called the universal mass, which exists in every local unitary 3d $\mathcal{N}=4$ SCFT, drives Abelian gauge theories to gapped Abelian fractional-quantum-Hall-like phases described by spin Chern-Simons TQFTs. The authors argue that the deformed phase diagram contains a single second-order transition at zero mass and prove that mirror symmetry descends to an isomorphism between the two TQFTs. They also explain how continuous flavor symmetries act on TQFT lines by symmetry fractionalization, reproducing the UV 't Hooft anomalies and fixing Hall conductance. If correct, mirror symmetry of these theories reduces to level-rank duality, and abstract SCFTs with certain mixed anomalies must flow to gapped theories containing a decoupled Abelian Lagrangian factor.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing objects are the one-loop K-matrices $\hat K_A$ and $\hat K_B$ and the integral-lattice duality conditions. $\hat K_A = \mathrm{sign}(m_A)\, q q^T \oplus \Pi_A$ encodes the Abelian spin TQFT obtained by integrating out massive matter; its lines are equivalence classes $[\vec\alpha]$ modulo $\hat K_A \mathbb{Z}^{\hat N_A}$, with a parity condition on $\hat K_A$-even shifts. Duality between $\hat T_A$ and $\hat T_B$ is proven by exhibiting integer matrices $\Gamma, \Gamma'$ whose compositions are identity lifts and which preserve topological spins; the crucial identities follow from the projectors $P = q^T(q q^T)^{-1}q$ and $\tilde P = \tilde q^T(\tilde q \tilde q^T)^{-1}\tilde q$, which satisfy $P + \tilde P = 1$ for mirror charge matrices.

What would settle it

Compute the partition function of the predicted spin TQFT $\hat T_A$ on a three-manifold such as $S^3$ with a chosen link and compare it with a direct calculation of the gapped phase obtained by deforming the strongly coupled IR SCFT; any mismatch in the topological link invariants or in the ground-state degeneracy on $T^2$ would falsify the claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the universal mass deformation can be defined in the UV of Abelian gauge theories by giving all hypermultiplets a common tree-level mass and letting one-loop effects generate Chern-Simons couplings. In the deep IR the deformed theory is an Abelian spin TQFT with K-matrix $\hat K_A = K_A \oplus \Pi_A$, where $K_A = \mathrm{sign}(m_A)\, q q^T$ for gauge/flavor charge matrix $q$, and $\Pi_A$ is an SPT stacking that makes the theory spin and fixes the central charge. The mirror theory, with charge matrix $\tilde q = q^{-1,T}$, produces $\hat K_B$ with $K_B = -\mathrm{sign}(m_A)\, \tilde q \tilde q^T$. The paper proves $\hat T_A \cong \hat T_B$ for every $\det q = \pm 1$ theory by constructing lattice maps $\Gamma, \Gamma'$ that satisfy four duality conditions, and argues the same for theories with one-form symmetry obtained by discrete gauging. It follows that 3d $\mathcal{N}=4$ mirror symmetry descends to a level-rank type duality of spin Chern-Simons theories.

Load-bearing premise

The argument depends on the assumption that the UV ancestor—tree-level common mass for all matter with zero bare Chern-Simons level plus one-loop generated Chern-Simons terms—is continuously connected to the universal deformation of the strongly coupled IR SCFT, with no phase transition as the mass-to-coupling ratio is lowered.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Mirror symmetry for these Abelian theories becomes an equivalence of spin Chern-Simons theories, so every mirror pair provides a new level-rank duality.
  • The IR TQFT is determined solely by the charge matrix and the sign of the universal mass; different UV gauge couplings cannot change it.
  • Continuous global symmetries act on TQFT lines by fractionalization rather than permutation, fixing the Hall conductance from the UV anomaly.
  • Abstract local unitary 3d $\mathcal{N}=4$ SCFTs with a prime-level $U(1)\times PSU(N)$ mixed anomaly must flow, under the universal deformation, to a TQFT with a decoupled Abelian Lagrangian factor.
  • The conjectured phase diagram has one second-order transition at zero universal mass, with mirror-related TQFTs on the two sides.

Reading between the lines

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

  • One could test the same descent in non-Abelian 3d $\mathcal{N}=4$ gauge theories: if mirror symmetry also reduces to level-rank dualities there, the K-matrix prescription would be a general map from gauge data to TQFT data.
  • The anomaly-matching mechanism suggests a practical diagnostic: the braiding of visons in the IR TQFT encodes the UV mixed anomaly, so measuring Hall conductance in a condensed-matter realization would directly probe SCFT data.
  • A natural extension is to use the universal mass to compare TQFTs across other RG dualities, not just mirror symmetry; the same integral-lattice criterion could certify whether any pair of charge matrices yields the same spin TQFT.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the IR fate of the universal mass deformation (1.1) of 3d N=4 SCFTs that arise from Abelian gauge theories. It defines a UV ancestor in which all matter gets a tree-level mass |m_A| >> g^2 and all UV Chern-Simons levels are zero; integrating out matter at one loop gives an Abelian spin TQFT with K-matrix \hat K_A = sign(m_A) q q^T \oplus \Pi_A, (2.12)-(2.14), and the mirror frame gives \hat K_B = -sign(m_A) \tilde q \tilde q^T \oplus \Pi_B, (2.24)-(2.26). For unimodular charge matrices, corresponding to theories without one-form symmetry, Sec. 3.2 proves \hat T_A \cong \hat T_B by explicitly constructing lattice isomorphisms that satisfy the duality conditions (1)-(4) after SPT stacking. Sec. 3.1 matches the UV mixed U(1) \times PSU(N_f) anomaly (3.7) by symmetry fractionalization and vison braiding, leading to (3.28)-(3.31). Sec. 4 extends the discussion by discrete gauging to theories with one-form symmetry, with an explicit SQED computation, and Sec. 5 gives a category-theoretic argument that any local unitary 3d N=4 SCFT with a U(1) \times PSU(N) anomaly (N prime) can be deformed to a gapped phase containing a decoupled Abelian spin Chern-Simons factor.

Significance. If the central descent assumption holds, this is a substantial result: it reduces mirror symmetry for a large class of Abelian 3d N=4 theories, under the universal deformation, to level-rank dualities of Abelian spin Chern-Simons theories, and it gives a concrete and falsifiable prescription for matching continuous 't Hooft anomalies in gapped IR phases. The paper's strengths are its explicit, parameter-free K-matrix computation; the matrix-level duality proof in Sec. 3.2, which is readily checkable; and the anomaly-matching mechanism via vison braiding. The main caveat is that the identification of the UV ancestor TQFT with the TQFT of the universal deformation of the strongly coupled SCFT is asserted via a 'we believe' statement in Sec. 2.1, footnote 12; this assumption is load-bearing for the mirror-symmetry-descent conclusions.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 2.1, footnote 12; Eqs. (2.12)-(2.14)] The load-bearing step of the paper is the continuous connectedness between the UV ancestor and the universal deformation of the IR SCFT. The one-loop computation at |m_A| >> g^2 defines an ancestor TQFT, but the claim that this is the TQFT reached by the universal deformation of the actual SCFT requires that no phase transition occurs as |m_A|/g^2 is lowered. The manuscript states 'we believe there is no phase transition' (footnote 12) but supplies no symmetry, anomaly, or index argument for this. Since the claimed phase diagram in Fig. 2, the duality (1.4), and the descent of mirror symmetry all depend on this bridge, the paper should either prove continuous connectedness in a solvable example (for instance N_f=1 SQED and its free-hypermultiplet mirror) or clearly separate the proven TQFT duality from a conjectural descent statement.
  2. [Sec. 3.2, conditions (1)-(4) and stacking argument] The proof in Sec. 3.2 establishes an isomorphism between the ancestor TQFTs \hat T_A and \hat T_B, whose K-matrices are computed at large |m|\gtrsim g^2. It does not, by itself, establish that these are the TQFTs obtained by deforming the interacting IR SCFT by the universal mass. The text's identification of the combined tree-level and one-loop deformation as 'the UV analog of the universal deformation' (Sec. 2.1) is a definitional assertion, not a theorem. The paper should explicitly state that the TQFT duality is unconditional, whereas the mirror-symmetry-descent conclusion is conditional on the no-phase-transition bridge identified above.
  3. [Sec. 4, around Eqs. (4.1)-(4.6)] For theories with one-form symmetry, the paper does not provide a proof of the same strength as in Sec. 3.2; it argues by discrete gauging of the topological symmetry and then checks the SQED family explicitly. The abstract and introduction claim arbitrary integer charges for the matter fields, and A3 is phrased generally. To avoid overclaiming, the paper should state precisely which one-form-symmetric cases are proven, which are supported only by the discrete-gauging argument, and which Smith normal form assumptions would be needed to extend the Sec. 3.2 proof.
  4. [Sec. 5, text above and below Eq. (5.2)] The theorem for abstract local unitary 3d N=4 SCFTs assumes that the IR of the universal deformation is a finite super-modular tensor category; footnote 42 concedes that this is a conjecture based on unitarity and the F-theorem. Because this theorem underlies the final claim that arbitrary such SCFTs with a U(1) \times PSU(N) anomaly can be deformed to a gapped phase with an Abelian Lagrangian factor, the conclusion should be phrased conditionally, or the finiteness assumption should be upgraded to a proof or a much more detailed justification.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Title page, author affiliations] The author affiliations contain typographical errors: 'Edinbu rgh' should be 'Edinburgh' and '2 2607 Hamburg' should be '22607 Hamburg'.
  2. [Fig. 3 caption] The phrase 'black dots become superflu ous' contains a typo and should read 'superfluous'.
  3. [Introduction and footnote 13] Footnote 13 says that the dualities in (1.4) are proved only for the no-one-form-symmetry case, but the discussion around A3 and the abstract may be read as covering all Abelian theories; please harmonize these statements.
  4. [Sec. 2, notation] The notation for the block charge matrices q, \hat q, \tilde q, and \tilde{\hat q} is dense; a small table of matrix dimensions would substantially improve readability.
  5. [References] References [1] and [24] are listed as 'to appear'; if versions are available by the time of publication, they should be updated.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the TQFT K-matrices and their duality are derived algebraically from the charge matrices, with no fitted constants; the anomaly matching is a consistency condition rather than a prediction.

full rationale

The central derivation is self-contained at the level of the ancestor TQFTs. The K-matrices in (2.12) and (2.24) are obtained by one-loop integrating-out of massive matter with no free parameters: K_A = sign(m_A) q q^T and K_B = -sign(m_A) \tilde q \tilde q^T, where \tilde q = q^{-1,T} is the mirror charge relation (2.6). The proof of \hat T_A ≅ \hat T_B in Sec. 3.2 is an algebraic argument: it defines projectors P = q^T(q q^T)^{-1} q and \tilde P = \tilde q^T(\tilde q \tilde q^T)^{-1}\tilde q, proves P + \tilde P = 1 and P \tilde P = 0, and verifies the duality conditions (1)-(4) using Γ = \tilde q \tilde{\hat q}^T and Γ' = q \hat q^T (Eqs. (3.62)-(3.67)). These matrices and identities are determined by the charge data, not chosen to force the duality; the only freedom is stacking with U(1)±1 SPTs, which is an explicitly tracked equivalence relation. The anomaly-matching discussion in Sec. 3.1 is a consistency condition rather than a prediction: the UV anomaly (3.7) is an input, and the fractionalization class is chosen to satisfy n_1 n_2 = 1 mod N_f (3.31), with the paper itself noting that the choice is somewhat arbitrary. The load-bearing physical assumption is the continuous connection between the UV ancestor and the universal deformation of the SCFT (footnote 12); this is asserted rather than proven and is a correctness risk, but it is not a circular reduction because the TQFT computation and duality proof do not use the SCFT-side statement. The self-citations in the paper ([1], [7], [24], [30], [34]) are motivational, parenthetical, or 'to appear' remarks and are not load-bearing for the main derivation. Therefore no significant circularity is found.

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

The central derivation rests on the universal deformation from [4], mirror symmetry of Abelian gauge theories, the one-loop matching at large mass, the assumed continuous connection to the SCFT deformation, finiteness of the IR TQFT, and the category-theory theorem [33]. The only hand-chosen numerical inputs are the SPT extension matrices Pi_A and Pi_B used to make the duality proof work.

free parameters (1)
  • SPT stacking matrices Pi_A, Pi_B = diagonal +/-1 entries (discrete)
    Introduced in Eqs. (2.13) and (2.25) to make the extended K-matrices spin TQFTs with matching central charge and even diagonals; the proof of duality relies on choosing these blocks (Sec. 3.2, Eqs. (3.68)-(3.72)).
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Existence and algebra of the universal mass deformation (1.1)-(1.3) for any local unitary 3d N=4 SCFT
    Taken from Cordova-Dumitrescu-Intriligator [4]; the entire paper builds on this deformation.
  • domain assumption Mirror symmetry of Abelian 3d N=4 gauge theories (Intriligator-Seiberg, de Boer-Hori-Ooguri-Oz-Yin)
    Used to identify mirror pairs via q to q^{-1,T} in Eq. (2.6).
  • ad hoc to paper One-loop integrating out of massive matter yields the exact IR K-matrix with no phase transition as |m|/g^2 varies
    The computation (2.12) is done at |m| >> g^2; the extrapolation to strong coupling and to the SCFT deformation is asserted in Sec. 2.1 (footnote 12).
  • domain assumption The IR TQFT from a unitary gapped phase is a finite super-modular category (SMTC)
    Used in Sec. 5 to apply category theory; justified by F-theorem but not proven.
  • standard math Theorem 7.9 of Ng-Wang-Zhang [33] on super-modularity
    Black-box theorem in the proof of the Sec. 5 claim.
  • ad hoc to paper N is prime in the Sec. 5 theorem
    The proof of the Claim in Sec. 5 assumes N prime; generality is conjectural.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of 3d $\mathcal{N}=4$ Mirror Symmetry, TQFTs, and 't Hooft Anomaly Matching." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SKAWPF2U

@misc{pith2026241221066,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: 3d $\mathcalN=4$ Mirror Symmetry, TQFTs, and 't Hooft Anomaly Matching},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SKAWPF2U}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.21066}
}
abstract

Any local unitary 3d $\mathcal{N}=4$ superconformal field theory (SCFT) has a corresponding "universal" relevant deformation that takes it to a gapped phase. This deformation preserves all continuous internal symmetries, $\mathcal{S}$, and therefore also preserves any 't Hooft anomalies supported purely in $\mathcal{S}$. We describe the resulting phase diagram in the case of SCFTs that arise as the endpoints of renormalization group flows from 3d $\mathcal{N}=4$ Abelian gauge theories with any number of $U(1)$ gauge group factors and arbitrary integer charges for the matter fields. We argue that the universal deformations take these QFTs to Abelian fractional quantum Hall states in the infrared (IR), and we explain how to match 't Hooft anomalies between the non-topological ultraviolet theories and the IR topological quantum field theories (TQFTs). Along the way, we give a proof that 3d $\mathcal{N}=4$ mirror symmetry of our Abelian gauge theories descends to a duality of these TQFTs. Finally, using our anomaly matching discussion, we describe how to connect, via the renormalization group, abstract local unitary 3d $\mathcal{N}=4$ SCFTs with certain 't Hooft anomalies for their internal symmetries to IR phases (partially) described by Abelian spin Chern-Simons theories.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.21066 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A junction of continuous zero-form symmetry defects (corresponding to group elements, g, h, and gh) descended from the UV gauge theory / SCFT with an insertion of a line v (in red) from the IR TQFT leads to symmetry fractionalization and a non-trivial action of the symmetry on the IR lines. where J is the scaling-dimension-one primary of the multiplet that contains the traceless EM tensor, Tµν, and other currents re… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Our conjectured phase diagram, as a function of gauge couplings and the universal mass deformation, for an Abelian 3d N = 4 gauge theory, TA, with some arbitrary number of U(1) gauge group factors and arbitrary number of integer charge hypermultiplets (we assume throughout that there are no decoupled U(1) factors). Here the vertical direction represents flowing in the N = 4 gauge coupling(s), gA,a (a = 1, · · · , Nc… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. A generic graph corresponding to one of the Abelian gauge theories we study on the left and a quiver gauge theory that we also study on the right (we need only analyze connected graphs). In the generic theory, circles represent U(1) gauge group factors, while black vertices denote hypermultiplets charged under up to Nc different U(1) gauge groups. The lines connecting black dots and circles represent charges (each c… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The quiver for the mirror dual of 3d N = 4 SQED with Nf flavors. It is a U(1)Nf −1 quiver gauge theory with (bi)fundamental hypermultiplets emanating from the gauge nodes. At the level of line operators, this theory is equivalent to U(1)sign(mA)Nf spin CS theory for od…

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. Time-reversal invariant TQFTs from self-mirror symmetric SCFTs

    hep-th 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Self-mirror symmetric Abelian 3d N=4 SCFTs deform to time-reversal invariant Abelian Chern-Simons theories, with a charge-matrix constraint Q Omega Q^T = 0 governing the correspondence.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    To appear

    L. Bhardwaj, M. Bullimore, A. E. V. Ferrari & S. Schafer-Namek i, “To appear”

    work page

  2. [24]

    Time-reversal invariant TQFTs from self-mirror symmetri c SCFTs

    H. Jiang, “Time-reversal invariant TQFTs from self-mirror symmetri c SCFTs” , to ap- pear , 48

    work page

  3. [2]

    Anoma- lies of Generalized Symmetries from Solitonic Defects

    L. Bhardwaj, M. Bullimore, A. E. V. Ferrari & S. Schafer-Namek i, “Anoma- lies of Generalized Symmetries from Solitonic Defects” , SciPost Phys. 16, 087 (2024), arXiv:2205.15330 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2024

  4. [3]

    General- ized Symmetries and Anomalies of 3d N=4 SCFTs

    L. Bhardwaj, M. Bullimore, A. E. V. Ferrari & S. Schafer-Namek i, “General- ized Symmetries and Anomalies of 3d N=4 SCFTs” , SciPost Phys. 16, 080 (2024), arXiv:2301.02249 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2024

  5. [4]

    Deformations of Superconformal Theories

    C. Cordova, T. T. Dumitrescu & K. Intriligator, “Deformations of Superconformal Theories”, JHEP 1611, 135 (2016), arXiv:1602.01217 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2016

  6. [5]

    Phases Of Adjoint QCD 3 And Dualities

    J. Gomis, Z. Komargodski & N. Seiberg, “Phases Of Adjoint QCD 3 And Dualities” , SciPost Phys. 5, 007 (2018), arXiv:1710.03258 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2018

  7. [6]

    Mirror symmetry in three-dimensional gauge theories

    K. A. Intriligator & N. Seiberg, “Mirror symmetry in three-dimensional gauge theories” , Phys. Lett. B 387, 513 (1996), hep-th/9607207

    arXiv 1996

  8. [7]

    From free fields to interacting SCFTs via representation th eory

    M. Buican & H. Jiang, “From free fields to interacting SCFTs via representation th eory”, JHEP 2408, 230 (2024), arXiv:2308.03194 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2024

Show all 42 references
  1. [8]

    Boundary vertex algebras for 3d N = 4 rank-0 SCFTs

    A. E. V. Ferrari, N. Garner & H. Kim, “Boundary vertex algebras for 3d N = 4 rank-0 SCFTs”, SciPost Phys. 17, 057 (2024), arXiv:2311.05087 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Mirror Symmetry and Level-rank Duality for 3d N = 4 Rank 0 SCFTs

    T. Creutzig, N. Garner & H. Kim, “Mirror Symmetry and Level-rank Duality for 3d N = 4 Rank 0 SCFTs” , arXiv:2406.00138 [hep-th]

  3. [10]

    Mirror symmetry in three-dimensional theories, SL(2,Z) and D-brane moduli spaces

    J. de Boer, K. Hori, H. Ooguri, Y. Oz & Z. Yin, “Mirror symmetry in three-dimensional theories, SL(2,Z) and D-brane moduli spaces” , Nucl. Phys. B 493, 148 (1997), hep-th/9612131

    1997 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Symmetry Fractionaliza- tion, Defects, and Gauging of Topological Phases

    M. Barkeshli, P. Bonderson, M. Cheng & Z. Wang, “Symmetry Fractionaliza- tion, Defects, and Gauging of Topological Phases” , Phys. Rev. B 100, 115147 (2019), arXiv:1410.4540 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2019 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Gauging U(1) symmetry in (2+1)d topological phases

    M. Cheng & C.-M. Jian, “Gauging U(1) symmetry in (2+1)d topological phases” , SciPost Phys. 12, 202 (2022), arXiv:2201.07239 [cond-mat.str-el] ✦ M. Cheng, P.-S. Hsin & C.-M. Jian, “Gauging Lie group symmetry in (2+1)d topological phases” , SciPost Phys. 14, 100 (2023), arXiv:2...

    2022 arXiv

  6. [13]

    On mirror symmetry in three-dimensional Abelian gauge theories

    A. Kapustin & M. J. Strassler, “On mirror symmetry in three-dimensional Abelian gauge theories” , JHEP 9904, 021 (1999), hep-th/9902033 47

    1999 arXiv

  7. [14]

    Fivebranes from gauge theory

    H. Lin & J. M. Maldacena, “Fivebranes from gauge theory” , Phys. Rev. D 74, 084014 (2006), hep-th/0509235

    2006 arXiv

  8. [15]

    Janus Configurations, Chern-Simons Couplings, And The theta-Angle in N=4 Super Yang-Mills Theory

    D. Gaiotto & E. Witten, “Janus Configurations, Chern-Simons Couplings, And The theta-Angle in N=4 Super Yang-Mills Theory” , JHEP 1006, 097 (2010), arXiv:0804.2907 [hep-th]

    2010 arXiv

  9. [16]

    On N = 4 supersymmetry enhancements in three dimensions

    B. Assel, Y. Tachikawa & A. Tomasiello, “On N = 4 supersymmetry enhancements in three dimensions”, JHEP 2303, 170 (2023), arXiv:2209.13984 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  10. [17]

    N=4 Superconformal Chern- Simons Theories with Hyper and Twisted Hyper Multiplets

    K. Hosomichi, K.-M. Lee, S. Lee, S. Lee & J. Park, “N=4 Superconformal Chern- Simons Theories with Hyper and Twisted Hyper Multiplets” , JHEP 0807, 091 (2008), arXiv:0805.3662 [hep-th]

    2008 arXiv

  11. [18]

    Mapping Anomalous Cur- rents in Supersymmetric Dualities

    S. Abel, M. Buican & Z. Komargodski, “Mapping Anomalous Cur- rents in Supersymmetric Dualities” , Phys. Rev. D 84, 045005 (2011), arXiv:1105.2885 [hep-th] ✦ M. Buican, “Non-Perturbative Constraints on Light Sparticles from Properties of the RG Flow” , JHEP 1410, 026 (2014), ar...

    2011 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Multiplets of Superconformal Sym- metry in Diverse Dimensions

    C. Cordova, T. T. Dumitrescu & K. Intriligator, “Multiplets of Superconformal Sym- metry in Diverse Dimensions” , JHEP 1903, 163 (2019), arXiv:1612.00809 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  13. [20]

    The Coulomb Branch of 3d N = 4 Theories

    M. Bullimore, T. Dimofte & D. Gaiotto, “The Coulomb Branch of 3d N = 4 Theories”, Commun. Math. Phys. 354, 671 (2017), arXiv:1503.04817 [hep-th]

    2017 arXiv

  14. [21]

    Anyon scattering from lightcone Hamiltonian: the singlet channel

    B. Gabai, J. Sandor & X. Yin, “Anyon scattering from lightcone Hamiltonian: the singlet channel” , JHEP 2209, 145 (2022), arXiv:2205.09144 [hep-th] ✦ S. Jain, M. Mandlik, S. Minwalla, T. Takimi, S. R. Wadia & S. Yokoyama, “Unitarity, Crossing Symmetry and Duality of the S-matr...

    2022 arXiv

  15. [22]

    All Possible Generators of Supersymmetries of the s Matrix

    R. Haag, J. T. Lopuszanski & M. Sohnius, “All Possible Generators of Supersymmetries of the s Matrix” , Nucl. Phys. B 88, 257 (1975)

    1975

  16. [23]

    Symmetries of Abelian Chern-Simons Theories and Arith- metic

    D. Delmastro & J. Gomis, “Symmetries of Abelian Chern-Simons Theories and Arith- metic”, JHEP 2103, 006 (2021), arXiv:1904.12884 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Level/rank Duality and Chern-Simons-Matter Theories

    P.-S. Hsin & N. Seiberg, “Level/rank Duality and Chern-Simons-Matter Theories” , JHEP 1609, 095 (2016), arXiv:1607.07457 [hep-th]

    2016 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Completion of a partial integral matrix to a unimodular mat rix

    X. Zhan, “Completion of a partial integral matrix to a unimodular mat rix”, Linear al- gebra and its applications 414, 373 (2006)

    2006

  19. [27]

    On 2-group global symmetries and their anomalies

    F. Benini, C. C´ ordova & P.-S. Hsin, “On 2-group global symmetries and their anomalies” , Journal of High Energy Physics 2019, P. (2019), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2019)118

    2019 doi

  20. [28]

    S-Duality of Boundary Conditions In N=4 Super Yang-Mills Theory

    D. Gaiotto & E. Witten, “S-Duality of Boundary Conditions In N=4 Super Yang-Mills Theory” , Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 13, 721 (2009), arXiv:0807.3720 [hep-th] ✦ V. Borokhov, A. Kapustin & X.-k. Wu, “Monopole operators and mirror symmetry in three-dimensions” , JHEP 0212, 044 (20...

    2009 arXiv

  21. [29]

    3d N = 4 mirror symmetry with 1-form symmetry

    S. Nawata, M. Sperling, H. E. Wang & Z. Zhong, “3d N = 4 mirror symmetry with 1-form symmetry” , SciPost Phys. 15, 033 (2023), arXiv:2301.02409 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Coupling a QFT to a TQFT and duality

    A. Kapustin & N. Seiberg, “Coupling a QFT to a TQFT and duality” , Journal of High Energy Physics 2014, N. Seiberg (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2014)001 ✦ M. Balasubramanian, M. Buican & R. Radhakrishnan, “On the Classification of Bosonic and Fermionic One-Form Symm...

    2014 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Global Symmetries, Counterterms, and Duality in Chern-Simons Matter Theories with Orthogona l Gauge Groups

    C. Cordova, P.-S. Hsin & N. Seiberg, “Global Symmetries, Counterterms, and Duality in Chern-Simons Matter Theories with Orthogona l Gauge Groups” , SciPost Phys. 4, 021 (2018), arXiv:1711.10008 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Moduli spaces in CFT: large charge operators

    G. Cuomo, L. Rastelli & A. Sharon, “Moduli spaces in CFT: large charge operators” , JHEP 2409, 185 (2024), arXiv:2406.19441 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Modular Categories with Transitive Galois Actions

    S.-H. Ng, Y. Wang & Q. Zhang, “Modular Categories with Transitive Galois Actions” , Communications in Mathematical Physics 390, 1271–1310 (2022), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00220-021-04287-5

    2022 doi

  26. [34]

    Invertibility of Condensation Defects and Symmetries of 2 + 1d QFTs

    M. Buican & R. Radhakrishnan, “Invertibility of Condensation Defects and Symmetries of 2 + 1d QFTs” , Commun. Math. Phys. 405, 217 (2024), arXiv:2309.15181 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Three-dimensional gauge theories with supersymmetry en- hancement

    D. Gang & M. Yamazaki, “Three-dimensional gauge theories with supersymmetry en- hancement”, Phys. Rev. D 98, 121701 (2018), arXiv:1806.07714 [hep-th] 49

    2018 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Non-unitary TQFTs from 3D N = 4 rank 0 SCFTs

    D. Gang, S. Kim, K. Lee, M. Shim & M. Yamazaki, “Non-unitary TQFTs from 3D N = 4 rank 0 SCFTs” , JHEP 2108, 158 (2021), arXiv:2103.09283 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Non-hyperbolic 3-manifolds and 3D field theories for 2D Virasoro minimal models

    D. Gang, H. Kang & S. Kim, “Non-hyperbolic 3-manifolds and 3D field theories for 2D Virasoro minimal models” , arXiv:2405.16377 [hep-th]

  30. [38]

    M-theoretic Genesis of Topological Phases

    G. Y. Cho, D. Gang & H.-C. Kim, “M-theoretic Genesis of Topological Phases” , JHEP 2011, 115 (2020), arXiv:2007.01532 [hep-th]

    2020 arXiv

  31. [39]

    A Duality Web in 2+1 Dimensions and Condensed Matter Physics

    N. Seiberg, T. Senthil, C. Wang & E. Witten, “A Duality Web in 2+1 Dimensions and Condensed Matter Physics” , Annals Phys. 374, 395 (2016), arXiv:1606.01989 [hep-th]

    2016 arXiv

  32. [40]

    A one-dimensional theory for Higgs branch operators

    M. Dedushenko, S. S. Pufu & R. Yacoby, “A one-dimensional theory for Higgs branch operators”, JHEP 1803, 138 (2018), arXiv:1610.00740 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Scattering in Mass-Deformed N>=4 Chern- Simons Models

    A. Agarwal, N. Beisert & T. McLoughlin, “Scattering in Mass-Deformed N>=4 Chern- Simons Models” , JHEP 0906, 045 (2009), arXiv:0812.3367 [hep-th]

    2009 arXiv

  34. [42]

    I-brane dynamics

    N. Itzhaki, D. Kutasov & N. Seiberg, “I-brane dynamics” , JHEP 0601, 119 (2006), hep-th/0508025 50

    2006 arXiv

Pith tools

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