Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 3 cited by

Twisted Partition Functions as Order Parameters

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The symmetry-twisted partition function is a universal order parameter that distinguishes SSB, SPT, and SET gapped phases.

desk verdict A solid, honest paper: the continuous U(1) analysis is genuinely new, while the 4d discrete-symmetry classification is a repackaged result that inherits one load-bearing, openly flagged completeness assumption. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.16546 v2 pith:OCNJSA27 submitted 2025-05-22 hep-th cond-mat.str-el

Jun Maeda , Yuya Tanizaki This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thcond-mat.str-el
keywords twistedpartitionfunctionorderparameterspontaneoussymmetrybreakingsymmetry-protectedtopologicalsymmetry-enriched1-formWilson-'tHooftclassificationsolitonic
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

Symmetry-twisted partition functions—partition functions evaluated with a background gauge field for a global symmetry turned on—carry enough information to tell the major classes of gapped phases apart. Spontaneous symmetry breaking makes the twisted partition function decay exponentially; symmetry-protected topological states give it a pure topological phase factor; and symmetry-enriched topological states make it decay for exactly the background configurations that force vortex or monopole excitations. In 4d gauge theories with $\mathbb{Z}_N^{(1)}$ symmetry, the paper derives the explicit form $Z[B]=\delta_{N/n}[B]\exp\bigl(\frac{2\pi i k}{n}\int \frac{1}{2}\frac{nB}{N}\cup\frac{nB}{N}\bigr)$ and shows that its deconfined lines are generated by $W^n$ and $W^{-k}H^{N/n}$, which reproduces the Wilson–'t Hooft classification. For spontaneously broken $U(1)$ symmetry, a non-flat background forces a vortex and makes the twisted partition function vanish, a consequence of the mixed anomaly with the emergent solitonic symmetry. This matters because a single computable quantity could serve as a practical phase diagnostic without requiring prior knowledge of local order parameters or anyon data.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the twisted partition function $Z[A]=\int D\phi\, e^{-S[\phi,A]}$, defined by coupling the theory to a background gauge field, equivalently by imposing symmetry-twisted boundary conditions. Its low-energy behavior is computed by replacing the gapped phase with an effective topological field theory: the SSB phase gives a delta functional $\delta(A)$, the SPT phase gives an invertible topological action $Z_{\mathrm{inv}}[A]$, and the SET phase gives $\delta(\alpha(A))$, where $\alpha(A)$ is a symmetry-fractionalization 2-form built from the background gauge fields. In the 4d $\mathbb{Z}_N^{(1)}$ case, the central identity is Eq. (3.3), $Z[B]=\delta_{N/n}[B]\exp\bigl(\frac{2\pi i k}{n}\int \frac{1}{2}\frac{nB}{N}\cup \frac{nB}{N}\bigr)$, which encodes both the unbroken subgroup $\mathbb{Z}_n$ (through the holonomies of $B$ that survive) and the SPT label $k$; gauge invariance of this expression selects the deconfined lines generated by $W^n$ and $W^{-k}H^{N/n}$. For continuous $U(1)$, the machinery is the mixed 't Hooft anomaly $S_{\mathrm{inflow}}=\frac{i}{2\pi}\int B\wedge dA$ between the broken symmetry and the emergent winding symmetry, which forces $Z[A]$ to vanish for non-flat $A$.

What would settle it

Look for a 4d gapped phase with $\mathbb{Z}_N$ one-form symmetry whose twisted partition function is not of the stated form: for example, on $T^4$, if $Z[B]$ does not vanish except when $B$ has $N/n$-quantized holonomies, if the surviving phase factor is not the quadratic term, or if more than $N$ deconfined line operators appear, then the claimed Wilson–'t Hooft correspondence fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the symmetry-twisted partition function $Z[A]$, the partition function evaluated with a background gauge field for a global symmetry, is a universal order parameter for gapped phases: in a spontaneously broken phase it is exponentially suppressed (a delta functional at long distances), in a symmetry-protected topological phase it survives as an invertible topological phase $Z_{\mathrm{inv}}[A]$, and in a symmetry-enriched topological phase it is exponentially suppressed precisely when the background activates vortex or monopole excitations carrying fractionalized symmetry. For 4d theories with $\mathbb{Z}_N^{(1)}$ symmetry on torsion-free spin manifolds, the paper derives $Z[B]=\delta_{N/n}[B]\exp\bigl(\frac{2\pi i k}{n}\int \frac{1}{2}\,\frac{nB}{N}\cup \frac{nB}{N}\bigr)$, labeled by a divisor $n$ of $N$ and an SPT label $k\in\mathbb{Z}_n$, and shows that the deconfined line operators are generated by $W^n$ and $W^{-k}H^{N/n}$ — precisely the lines of the Wilson–'t Hooft classification. For a spontaneously broken $U(1)$ symmetry, it shows that a flat twist requires a careful low-temperature, large-volume hierarchy, while a non-flat twist forces a vortex and makes $Z[A]$ decay, a consequence of the mixed anomaly between the broken $U(1)$ and the emergent solitonic symmetry.

Load-bearing premise

The completeness of the 4d result assumes that every gapped phase with $\mathbb{Z}_N$ one-form symmetry is a spontaneous breaking to a subgroup $\mathbb{Z}_n$ stacked with a symmetry-protected-topological layer of the unbroken $\mathbb{Z}_n$, with no additional fine-tuned fractionalization of the symmetry on line operators; the paper states this as an assumption rather than proving it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If correct, the twisted partition function labels every gapped phase of a 4d theory with $\mathbb{Z}_N^{(1)}$ symmetry by a divisor $n$ of $N$ and an SPT label $k\in\mathbb{Z}_n$.
  • The deconfined (perimeter-law) lines in such a phase are exactly the $N$ lines generated by $W^n$ and $W^{-k}H^{N/n}$; all other Wilson–'t Hooft lines obey the area law.
  • The same quantity distinguishes SSB from SET phases by the pattern of exponential suppression: SSB suppresses any nontrivial twist, while SET suppresses only twists that activate fractionalized vortex or monopole excitations.
  • For continuous $U(1)$ SSB, the flat-twist partition function requires the hierarchy $1/(2v^2L^{d-1})\ll 1/\beta\ll 1/L$ to detect orthogonality of vacua, and a non-flat twist decays with vortex tension; both behaviors are controlled by the mixed anomaly with the emergent solitonic symmetry.
  • The twisted partition function is a candidate for direct numerical evaluation, for instance with tensor renormalization-group methods, making the phase diagnosis computable.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: The zero-pattern of $Z[B]$ on a four-torus is a concrete falsifiable signature: for each divisor $n$, $Z[B]$ should vanish unless the background flux is $N/n$-quantized, and the remaining phase should be the quadratic SPT term; a lattice computation could check this directly.
  • Editorial inference: The same delta-times-topological-phase structure should apply to higher-form symmetries in other spacetime dimensions whenever symmetry fractionalization is absent, so the method is likely a general phase-labeling scheme rather than a 4d speciality.
  • Editorial inference: The mixed-anomaly explanation for $U(1)$ suggests that in any SSB phase, turning on a background field that couples to an emergent solitonic symmetry will force the twisted partition function to vanish; the paper sketches the $SO(3)\to SO(2)$ example, which could be promoted to an explicit check.
  • Editorial caution: The 4d completeness rests on an assumption the paper states but does not prove; if a gapped $\mathbb{Z}_N^{(1)}$-symmetric phase with unconventional line fractionalization exists, its twisted partition function would not fit (3.3), and the Wilson–'t Hooft correspondence would need revision.
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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes the symmetry-twisted partition function Z[A], the partition function in the presence of a background gauge field for a global symmetry, as a universal order parameter for gapped phases. Section 2 studies discrete symmetries and gives worked examples: complete and partial SSB produce delta-function-like behavior, SPT states produce a topological response, and SET states produce exponential suppression when twisted along cycles with non-commuting symmetry generators. It then reformulates these behaviors in terms of low-energy TFTs and the SymTFT. Section 3 applies the framework to 4d theories with Z_N^(1) 1-form symmetry, obtaining the expression Z[B] = δ_{N/n}[B] exp((2πik/n) ∫ (1/2)(nB/N)∪(nB/N)) (Eq. (3.3)) and showing that the deconfined line operators are generated by W^n and W^{-k}H^{N/n}, matching the Wilson-'t Hooft classification. Section 4 treats continuous U(1) symmetry: in the SSB phase, flat background fields lead to exponential suppression under a specific hierarchy of limits, while non-flat backgrounds require vortex excitations and vanish; this is interpreted through a mixed anomaly with the emergent solitonic symmetry.

Significance. If the classification input is sound, the paper delivers a genuinely useful diagnostic: the twisted partition function distinguishes SSB, SPT, and SET states in the examples, and in 4d it provides a direct bridge to the Wilson-'t Hooft classification without dimensional reduction. The low-dimensional computations are careful about the order of the infinite-volume and zero-temperature limits, and the discussion of the Coleman-Mermin-Wagner theorem in Section 4 is a nice check. The SymTFT perspective in Section 2.3 is a clear conceptual packaging of the results. The paper also makes a concrete suggestion for numerical implementation via tensor renormalization group. The main limitation is that the central 4d claim inherits an asserted classification of gapped phases with Z_N^(1) symmetry; this is not derived in the paper.

major comments (2)
  1. [3.1, Eq. (3.3)] The classification underlying Eq. (3.3) is asserted rather than derived. The text states that "symmetry fractionalization on anyons does not occur" because the next nontrivial group cohomology starts at degree 4 and the spacetime dimension is 4, but no argument is given for this claim, and footnote 18 itself provides a fine-tuned counterexample (N=1 SYM) with Z[B] = δ_N[1/2 B∪B]. Since Eq. (3.3) is the input for the deconfined line spectrum (3.4) and for the claimed equality with the Wilson-'t Hooft classification, this completeness assumption is load-bearing. The authors should either derive the classification from a stated mathematical classification of 4d gapped phases with Z_N^(1) on torsion-free spin manifolds, or explicitly present it as an assumption imported from Ref. [17] and discuss its status.
  2. [2.2] The paper's central diagnostic relies on the working hypothesis that gapped RG fixed points are described by TFTs. This is standard and explicitly acknowledged, but it means the proposed order-parameter characterization is not unconditional. In particular, if there exist gapped phases whose low-energy limits are not TFTs (or whose partition functions have non-topological parts), the classification in Section 3.1 would miss them. The authors should state this caveat prominently in the abstract or introduction, since the abstract's claim that the twisted partition function "works as an order parameter" is stated without qualification.
minor comments (4)
  1. [2.2 and 2.3] There are several typos that should be corrected, for example "fxed-point" in Section 2.2, "low-eneryg" in Section 2.3, "Poission" in Section 2.1.2, and "correponds" in Section 3.2.
  2. [3.1] The variable B_n is used in Eq. (3.2) before it is defined after Eq. (3.3). Please define B_n := nB/N before the first use.
  3. [Abstract] The abstract states that the twisted partition function "works as an order parameter that discriminates" SSB, SPT, and SET states, but Section 2.3 explicitly says that giving the general classification of Z[A] goes beyond the scope of the paper. The examples support the claim in specific classes, but the unqualified statement may overstate the generality. I suggest adding a qualifier such as "in the examples and classes studied here."
  4. [3.2] The gauge variation of the quadratic action in Eq. (3.10) assumes a particular choice of lift for the Z_N-valued 2-cocycle to integer cohomology; for even N, the constant term δλ∪δλ may require a more careful treatment. Please clarify the convention used.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No constructional circularity; Eq. (3.3) is imported from Refs. [17,18] with a caveated completeness assumption, but the line-operator and U(1) derivations are direct.

full rationale

The derivation chain is mostly self-contained. Section 2 computes the twisted partition function for SSB, SPT, and SET states from explicit Lagrangians and TFT arguments (e.g. Eqs. (2.32), (2.37), (2.45)); no parameter is fitted and no equation is the input by construction. The central 4d formula, Eq. (3.3), is presented as the classification result of Refs. [17,18], and Ref. [17] is co-authored by Tanizaki. However, the formula is not justified only by that self-citation: Ref. [18] is independent, and the same form follows from the paper's own Section 2.2 results by stacking the SSB delta-functional response with the SPT exponential response. The real weakness is the completeness assumption in Section 3.1 — that on torsion-free spin manifolds all gapped phases with Z_N^(1) are SSB to Z_n stacked with an SPT of the unbroken Z_n — which is asserted from a cohomology-degree argument. The paper itself flags the limits of this assertion in footnote 18 with the N=1 SYM counterexample and in Section 5, where it leaves as an open question whether the twisted partition function can distinguish all gapped phases. That is a correctness risk, not a circular reduction. Section 3.2 then derives the deconfined line spectrum generated by W^n and W^{-k}H^{N/n} directly from Eq. (3.3) via gauge invariance (e + km = 0), so the Wilson-'t Hooft matching is not assumed. Section 4 is a direct computation of the U(1) twisted partition function with a standard mixed-anomaly interpretation. No fitted input is renamed as a prediction, and no claimed result is equivalent to its input by construction. The score of 2 reflects the noticeable but non-load-bearing self-citation [17] in the 4d classification step.

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

The central claim rests on the TFT fixed-point hypothesis, the SymTFT boundary classification, the completeness of the 4d phase classification, and known mixed anomalies. No free parameters are fitted to data. No new entities are introduced.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption A fully gapped QFT flows to a topological field theory under RG, and this TFT preserves the global symmetry, so Z_QFT[A] can be replaced by Z_TFT[A] for the low-energy behavior.
    Section 2.2, first paragraph, calls this a widely-accepted working hypothesis. The delta-functional and phase formulas (2.32), (2.37), (2.45) all rely on this replacement.
  • domain assumption Gapped phases of a QFT with finite symmetry C are in one-to-one correspondence with topological boundaries of the C SymTFT.
    Section 2.3 and Eqs. (2.47)-(2.53) use this correspondence (citing Refs. [49-52]) to reinterpret the twisted partition function patterns.
  • domain assumption The complete set of gapped phases of 4d Z_N^(1)-symmetric theories on torsion-free spin manifolds is SSB to Z_n stacked with an SPT of Z_n; SET or symmetry-fractionalized states are excluded unless fine-tuned.
    Section 3.1 asserts this to write Eq. (3.3); footnote 18 admits fine-tuned exceptions. This is the load-bearing completeness assumption for the Wilson-'t Hooft claim.
  • domain assumption The broken U(1) symmetry and the emergent winding symmetry of the S1 nonlinear sigma model have a mixed anomaly with inflow action i/(2 pi) integral B wedge dA.
    Section 4.3 relies on this standard anomaly (Refs. [61,62]) to conclude that non-flat backgrounds force the twisted partition function to vanish.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Twisted Partition Functions as Order Parameters." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OCNJSA27

@misc{pith2026250516546,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Twisted Partition Functions as Order Parameters},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OCNJSA27}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.16546}
}
read the original abstract

For quantum field theories with global symmetry, we can study the behavior of the partition function with the background gauge field to diagnose different quantum phases. For the case of discrete symmetries, we find that the symmetry-twisted partition function works as an order parameter that discriminates spontaneous symmetry breaking (SSB), symmetry-protected topological (SPT) states, and symmetry-enriched topological (SET) states. We then consider its application to the case of 4d Yang-Mills theory with adjoint matters to understand the relation between the twisted partition function and the Wilson-'t Hooft classification. We also study its behavior for the spontaneously broken U(1) symmetry and interpret the result from the viewpoint of the mixed anomaly with the emergent solitonic symmetry.

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

  1. Deconfinement from Thermal Tensor Networks: Universal CFT signature in (2+1)-dimensional $\mathbb{Z}_N$ lattice gauge theory

    hep-th 2026-02 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Tensor-network contraction of finite-temperature Z_N gauge theory yields central charges and scaling dimensions consistent with Svetitsky–Yaffe universality for N=2,3,5, including a U(1)-symmetric BKT phase for N=5, a...

  2. Anomaly-induced vanishing of brane partition functions

    hep-th 2025-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Anomalies imply vanishing brane partition functions; this yields unified derivations of the Freed-Witten and M5 shifted-quantization conditions and new S-fold D3-brane constraints.

  3. 2d Cardy-Rabinovici model with the modified Villain lattice: Exact dualities and symmetries

    hep-th 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    The 2d Cardy-Rabinovici model is constructed on a modified Villain lattice, making rescaled theta periodicity and strong-weak duality exact at finite spacing and giving a symmetry-based phase classification.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [17]

    Study of gapped phases of 4d gauge theories using temporal gauging of the ZN 1-form symmetry,

    M. Nguyen, Y. Tanizaki, and M. ¨Unsal, “Study of gapped phases of 4d gauge theories using temporal gauging of the ZN 1-form symmetry,” JHEP 08 (2023) 013, arXiv:2306.02485 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2023

  2. [1]

    Generalized Global Symmetries,

    D. Gaiotto, A. Kapustin, N. Seiberg, and B. Willett, “Generalized Global Symmetries,” JHEP 02 (2015) 172, arXiv:1412.5148 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2015

  3. [2]

    On the theory of phase transitions,

    L. D. Landau, “On the theory of phase transitions,” Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.7 (1937) 19–32

    work page 1937

  4. [3]

    Topological Order in Rigid States,

    X. G. Wen, “Topological Order in Rigid States,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. B4 (1990) 239

    work page 1990

  5. [4]

    Periodic table for topological insulators and superconductors,

    A. Kitaev, “Periodic table for topological insulators and superconductors,” AIP Conf. Proc. 1134 no. 1, (2009) 22–30, arXiv:0901.2686 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    arXiv 2009

  6. [5]

    Symmetry protected topological phases in non-interacting fermion systems

    X.-G. Wen, “Symmetry protected topological phases in non-interacting fermion systems,” Phys. Rev. B85 (2012) 085103, arXiv:1111.6341 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2012

  7. [6]

    Classifying gauge anomalies through symmetry-protected trivial orders and classifying gravitational anomalies through topological orders,

    X.-G. Wen, “Classifying gauge anomalies through symmetry-protected trivial orders and classifying gravitational anomalies through topological orders,” Phys. Rev. D88 no. 4, (2013) 045013, arXiv:1303.1803 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2013

  8. [7]

    Symmetry Protected Topological Phases, Anomalies, and Cobordisms: Beyond Group Cohomology,

    A. Kapustin, “Symmetry Protected Topological Phases, Anomalies, and Cobordisms: Beyond Group Cohomology,” arXiv:1403.1467 [cond-mat.str-el]

    arXiv

Show all 73 references
  1. [8]

    Anomalous Symmetry Fractionalization and Surface Topological Order,

    X. Chen, F. J. Burnell, A. Vishwanath, and L. Fidkowski, “Anomalous Symmetry Fractionalization and Surface Topological Order,” Phys. Rev. X5 no. 4, (2015) 041013, arXiv:1403.6491 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2015 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Symmetry Fractionalization, Defects, and Gauging of Topological Phases,

    M. Barkeshli, P. Bonderson, M. Cheng, and Z. Wang, “Symmetry Fractionalization, Defects, and Gauging of Topological Phases,” Phys. Rev. B100 no. 11, (2019) 115147, arXiv:1410.4540 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2019 arXiv

  3. [10]

    Categorical symmetry and noninvertible anomaly in symmetry-breaking and topological phase transitions,

    W. Ji and X.-G. Wen, “Categorical symmetry and noninvertible anomaly in symmetry-breaking and topological phase transitions,” Phys. Rev. Res.2 no. 3, (2020) 033417, arXiv:1912.13492 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2020 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Symmetry TFTs from String Theory,

    F. Apruzzi, F. Bonetti, I. n. Garc ´ ıa Etxebarria, S. S. Hosseini, and S. Schafer-Nameki, “Symmetry TFTs from String Theory,” Commun. Math. Phys.402 no. 1, (2023) 895–949, arXiv:2112.02092 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Topological symmetry in quantum field theory,

    D. S. Freed, G. W. Moore, and C. Teleman, “Topological symmetry in quantum field theory,” arXiv:2209.07471 [hep-th]. – 28 –

    arXiv

  6. [13]

    Symmetry as a shadow of topological order and a derivation of topological holographic principle,

    A. Chatterjee and X.-G. Wen, “Symmetry as a shadow of topological order and a derivation of topological holographic principle,” Phys. Rev. B107 no. 15, (2023) 155136, arXiv:2203.03596 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2023 arXiv

  7. [14]

    Topological holography: Towards a unification of Landau and beyond-Landau physics,

    H. Moradi, S. F. Moosavian, and A. Tiwari, “Topological holography: Towards a unification of Landau and beyond-Landau physics,” SciPost Phys. Core6 (2023) 066, arXiv:2207.10712 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2023 arXiv

  8. [15]

    Symmetry TFTs for Non-invertible Defects,

    J. Kaidi, K. Ohmori, and Y. Zheng, “Symmetry TFTs for Non-invertible Defects,” Commun. Math. Phys. 404 no. 2, (2023) 1021–1124, arXiv:2209.11062 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  9. [16]

    Symmetry TFTs for 3d QFTs from M-theory,

    M. van Beest, D. S. W. Gould, S. Schafer-Nameki, and Y.-N. Wang, “Symmetry TFTs for 3d QFTs from M-theory,” JHEP 02 (2023) 226, arXiv:2210.03703 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Non-invertible symmetries along 4d RG flows,

    J. A. Damia, R. Argurio, F. Benini, S. Benvenuti, C. Copetti, and L. Tizzano, “Non-invertible symmetries along 4d RG flows,” JHEP 02 (2024) 084, arXiv:2305.17084 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  11. [19]

    On the Phase Transition Towards Permanent Quark Confinement,

    G. ’t Hooft, “On the Phase Transition Towards Permanent Quark Confinement,” Nucl. Phys. B 138 (1978) 1–25

    1978

  12. [20]

    A Property of Electric and Magnetic Flux in Nonabelian Gauge Theories,

    G. ’t Hooft, “A Property of Electric and Magnetic Flux in Nonabelian Gauge Theories,” Nucl. Phys. B153 (1979) 141–160

    1979

  13. [21]

    Topology of the Gauge Condition and New Confinement Phases in Nonabelian Gauge Theories,

    G. ’t Hooft, “Topology of the Gauge Condition and New Confinement Phases in Nonabelian Gauge Theories,” Nucl. Phys. B190 (1981) 455–478

    1981

  14. [22]

    Reflection positivity and invertible topological phases,

    D. S. Freed and M. J. Hopkins, “Reflection positivity and invertible topological phases,” Geom. Topol.25 (2021) 1165–1330, arXiv:1604.06527 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  15. [23]

    On the cobordism classification of symmetry protected topological phases,

    K. Yonekura, “On the cobordism classification of symmetry protected topological phases,” Commun. Math. Phys.368 no. 3, (2019) 1121–1173, arXiv:1803.10796 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Gapped Boundary Phases of Topological Insulators via Weak Coupling,

    N. Seiberg and E. Witten, “Gapped Boundary Phases of Topological Insulators via Weak Coupling,” PTEP 2016 no. 12, (2016) 12C101, arXiv:1602.04251 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2016 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Dai-Freed theorem and topological phases of matter,

    K. Yonekura, “Dai-Freed theorem and topological phases of matter,” JHEP 09 (2016) 022, arXiv:1607.01873 [hep-th]

    2016 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Continuum dynamics of the 1-D Heisenberg antiferromagnetic identification with the O(3) nonlinear sigma model,

    F. D. M. Haldane, “Continuum dynamics of the 1-D Heisenberg antiferromagnetic identification with the O(3) nonlinear sigma model,” Phys. Lett. A93 (1983) 464–468

    1983

  19. [27]

    O (3) Nonlinear sigma Model and the Topological Distinction between Integer- and Half-Integer-Spin Antiferromagnets in Two Dimensions,

    F. D. M. Haldane, “O (3) Nonlinear sigma Model and the Topological Distinction between Integer- and Half-Integer-Spin Antiferromagnets in Two Dimensions,” Phys. Rev. Lett.61 (1988) 1029–1032

    1988

  20. [28]

    Anomaly and global inconsistency matching: θ-angles, SU (3)/U (1)2 nonlinear sigma model, SU (3) chains and its generalizations,

    Y. Tanizaki and T. Sulejmanpasic, “Anomaly and global inconsistency matching: θ-angles, SU (3)/U (1)2 nonlinear sigma model, SU (3) chains and its generalizations,” Phys. Rev. B98 no. 11, (2018) 115126, arXiv:1805.11423 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2018 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Symmetry-enriched quantum spin liquids in (3 + 1) d,

    P.-S. Hsin and A. Turzillo, “Symmetry-enriched quantum spin liquids in (3 + 1) d,” JHEP 09 (2020) 022, arXiv:1904.11550 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2020 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Anomalies and symmetry fractionalization,

    D. G. Delmastro, J. Gomis, P.-S. Hsin, and Z. Komargodski, “Anomalies and symmetry fractionalization,” SciPost Phys. 15 no. 3, (2023) 079, arXiv:2206.15118 [hep-th]. – 29 –

    2023 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Fractionalization of coset non-invertible symmetry and exotic Hall conductance,

    P.-S. Hsin, R. Kobayashi, and C. Zhang, “Fractionalization of coset non-invertible symmetry and exotic Hall conductance,” SciPost Phys. 17 no. 3, (2024) 095, arXiv:2405.20401 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Consequences of Symmetry Fractionalization without 1-Form Global Symmetries,

    T. D. Brennan, T. Jacobson, and K. Roumpedakis, “Consequences of Symmetry Fractionalization without 1-Form Global Symmetries,” arXiv:2504.08036 [hep-th]

  25. [33]

    Topological Field Theory, Higher Categories, and Their Applications,

    A. Kapustin, “Topological Field Theory, Higher Categories, and Their Applications,” in International Congress of Mathematicians. 4, 2010. arXiv:1004.2307 [math.QA]

    2010 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Braided fusion categories, gravitational anomalies, and the mathematical framework for topological orders in any dimensions,

    L. Kong and X.-G. Wen, “Braided fusion categories, gravitational anomalies, and the mathematical framework for topological orders in any dimensions,” arXiv:1405.5858 [cond-mat.str-el]

    arXiv

  27. [35]

    Topological Gauge Theories and Group Cohomology,

    R. Dijkgraaf and E. Witten, “Topological Gauge Theories and Group Cohomology,” Commun. Math. Phys.129 (1990) 393

    1990

  28. [36]

    Preroughening transitions in crystal surfaces and valence-bond phases in quantum spin chains,

    M. den Nijs and K. Rommelse, “Preroughening transitions in crystal surfaces and valence-bond phases in quantum spin chains,” Phys. Rev. B40 no. 7, (1989) 4709

    1989

  29. [37]

    Hidden symmetry breaking and the Haldane phase inS=1 quantum spin chains,

    T. Kennedy and H. Tasaki, “Hidden symmetry breaking and the Haldane phase inS=1 quantum spin chains,” Commun. Math. Phys.147 no. 3, (1992) 431–484

    1992

  30. [38]

    Hidden Z2 ×Z2 symmetry breaking in Haldane-gap antiferromagnets,

    T. Kennedy and H. Tasaki, “Hidden Z2 ×Z2 symmetry breaking in Haldane-gap antiferromagnets,” Phys. Rev. B45 no. 1, (1992) 304

    1992

  31. [39]

    Noninvertible duality transformation between symmetry-protected topological and spontaneous symmetry breaking phases,

    L. Li, M. Oshikawa, and Y. Zheng, “Noninvertible duality transformation between symmetry-protected topological and spontaneous symmetry breaking phases,” Phys. Rev. B 108 no. 21, (2023) 214429, arXiv:2301.07899 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2023 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Coupling a QFT to a TQFT and Duality,

    A. Kapustin and N. Seiberg, “Coupling a QFT to a TQFT and Duality,” JHEP 04 (2014) 001, arXiv:1401.0740 [hep-th]

    2014 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Topological Operators and Completeness of Spectrum in Discrete Gauge Theories,

    T. Rudelius and S.-H. Shao, “Topological Operators and Completeness of Spectrum in Discrete Gauge Theories,” JHEP 12 (2020) 172, arXiv:2006.10052 [hep-th]

    2020 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Semi-Abelian gauge theories, non-invertible symmetries, and string tensions beyond N -ality,

    M. Nguyen, Y. Tanizaki, and M. ¨Unsal, “Semi-Abelian gauge theories, non-invertible symmetries, and string tensions beyond N -ality,” JHEP 03 (2021) 238, arXiv:2101.02227 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Noninvertible 1-form symmetry and Casimir scaling in 2D Yang-Mills theory,

    M. Nguyen, Y. Tanizaki, and M. ¨Unsal, “Noninvertible 1-form symmetry and Casimir scaling in 2D Yang-Mills theory,” Phys. Rev. D104 no. 6, (2021) 065003, arXiv:2104.01824 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Non-invertible global symmetries and completeness of the spectrum,

    B. Heidenreich, J. McNamara, M. Montero, M. Reece, T. Rudelius, and I. Valenzuela, “Non-invertible global symmetries and completeness of the spectrum,” JHEP 09 (2021) 203, arXiv:2104.07036 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Higher dimensional algebra and topological quantum field theory,

    J. C. Baez and J. Dolan, “Higher dimensional algebra and topological quantum field theory,” J. Math. Phys.36 (1995) 6073–6105, arXiv:q-alg/9503002

    1995 arXiv

  38. [46]

    On the Classification of Topological Field Theories,

    J. Lurie, “On the Classification of Topological Field Theories,” arXiv:0905.0465 [math.CT]

    arXiv

  39. [47]

    On the Classification of Topological Orders,

    T. Johnson-Freyd, “On the Classification of Topological Orders,” Commun. Math. Phys.393 no. 2, (2022) 989–1033, arXiv:2003.06663 [math.CT]

    2022 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Classification of topological – 30 – phases with finite internal symmetries in all dimensions,

    L. Kong, T. Lan, X.-G. Wen, Z.-H. Zhang, and H. Zheng, “Classification of topological – 30 – phases with finite internal symmetries in all dimensions,” JHEP 09 (2020) 093, arXiv:2003.08898 [math-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Gapped phases with non-invertible symmetries: (1+1)d,

    L. Bhardwaj, L. E. Bottini, D. Pajer, and S. Sch¨ afer-Nameki, “Gapped phases with non-invertible symmetries: (1+1)d,” SciPost Phys. 18 no. 1, (2025) 032, arXiv:2310.03784 [hep-th]

    2025 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Categorical Landau Paradigm for Gapped Phases,

    L. Bhardwaj, L. E. Bottini, D. Pajer, and S. Schafer-Nameki, “Categorical Landau Paradigm for Gapped Phases,” Phys. Rev. Lett.133 no. 16, (2024) 161601, arXiv:2310.03786 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2024 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Gapped Phases in (2+1)d with Non-Invertible Symmetries: Part I,

    L. Bhardwaj, D. Pajer, S. Schafer-Nameki, A. Tiwari, A. Warman, and J. Wu, “Gapped Phases in (2+1)d with Non-Invertible Symmetries: Part I,” arXiv:2408.05266 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  44. [52]

    Gapped Phases in (2+1)d with Non-Invertible Symmetries: Part II,

    L. Bhardwaj, S. Schafer-Nameki, A. Tiwari, and A. Warman, “Gapped Phases in (2+1)d with Non-Invertible Symmetries: Part II,” arXiv:2502.20440 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  45. [53]

    Topological Field Theory on a Lattice, Discrete Theta-Angles and Confinement,

    A. Kapustin and R. Thorngren, “Topological Field Theory on a Lattice, Discrete Theta-Angles and Confinement,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.18 no. 5, (2014) 1233–1247, arXiv:1308.2926 [hep-th]

    2014 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Higher Symmetry and Gapped Phases of Gauge Theories,

    A. Kapustin and R. Thorngren, “Higher Symmetry and Gapped Phases of Gauge Theories,” Prog. Math.324 (2017) 177–202, arXiv:1309.4721 [hep-th]

    2017 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Topological Quantum Field Theory, Nonlocal Operators, and Gapped Phases of Gauge Theories,

    S. Gukov and A. Kapustin, “Topological Quantum Field Theory, Nonlocal Operators, and Gapped Phases of Gauge Theories,” arXiv:1307.4793 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  48. [56]

    There are no Goldstone bosons in two-dimensions,

    S. R. Coleman, “There are no Goldstone bosons in two-dimensions,” Commun. Math. Phys. 31 (1973) 259–264

    1973

  49. [57]

    Absence of ferromagnetism or antiferromagnetism in one-dimensional or two-dimensional isotropic Heisenberg models,

    N. D. Mermin and H. Wagner, “Absence of ferromagnetism or antiferromagnetism in one-dimensional or two-dimensional isotropic Heisenberg models,” Phys. Rev. Lett.17 (1966) 1133–1136

    1966

  50. [58]

    Comments on Abelian Higgs Models and Persistent Order,

    Z. Komargodski, A. Sharon, R. Thorngren, and X. Zhou, “Comments on Abelian Higgs Models and Persistent Order,” SciPost Phys. 6 no. 1, (2019) 003, arXiv:1705.04786 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Line Defect Quantum Numbers & Anomalies,

    T. D. Brennan, C. Cordova, and T. T. Dumitrescu, “Line Defect Quantum Numbers & Anomalies,” arXiv:2206.15401 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  52. [60]

    Gauging non-invertible symmetries on the lattice,

    S. Seifnashri, S.-H. Shao, and X. Yang, “Gauging non-invertible symmetries on the lattice,” arXiv:2503.02925 [cond-mat.str-el]

    arXiv

  53. [61]

    Anomalies of Generalized Symmetries from Solitonic Defects,

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

    2024 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Mixed Anomalies of Magnetic Symmetries,

    A. Sheckler, “Mixed Anomalies of Magnetic Symmetries,” arXiv:2503.08789 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  55. [63]

    Solitonic Symmetry beyond Homotopy: Invertibility from Bordism and Noninvertibility from Topological Quantum Field Theory,

    S. Chen and Y. Tanizaki, “Solitonic Symmetry beyond Homotopy: Invertibility from Bordism and Noninvertibility from Topological Quantum Field Theory,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 no. 1, (2023) 011602, arXiv:2210.13780 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Non-Invertible Defects in Nonlinear Sigma Models and Coupling to Topological Orders,

    P.-S. Hsin, “Non-Invertible Defects in Nonlinear Sigma Models and Coupling to Topological Orders,” arXiv:2212.08608 [cond-mat.str-el]

    arXiv

  57. [65]

    Solitonic symmetry as non-invertible symmetry: cohomology theories with TQFT coefficients,

    S. Chen and Y. Tanizaki, “Solitonic symmetry as non-invertible symmetry: cohomology theories with TQFT coefficients,” arXiv:2307.00939 [hep-th]. – 31 –

    arXiv

  58. [66]

    Emergent generalized symmetries in ordered phases and applications to quantum disordering,

    S. D. Pace, “Emergent generalized symmetries in ordered phases and applications to quantum disordering,” SciPost Phys. 17 no. 3, (2024) 080, arXiv:2308.05730 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2024 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Generalized symmetries in singularity-free nonlinear σ models and their disordered phases,

    S. D. Pace, C. Zhu, A. Beaudry, and X.-G. Wen, “Generalized symmetries in singularity-free nonlinear σ models and their disordered phases,” Phys. Rev. B110 no. 19, (2024) 195149, arXiv:2310.08554 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2024 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Tensor renormalization group approach to 2D classical lattice models,

    M. Levin and C. P. Nave, “Tensor renormalization group approach to 2D classical lattice models,” Phys. Rev. Lett.99 (2007) 120601, arXiv:cond-mat/0611687

    2007 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Tensor-Entanglement-Filtering Renormalization Approach and Symmetry Protected Topological Order,

    Z.-C. Gu and X.-G. Wen, “Tensor-Entanglement-Filtering Renormalization Approach and Symmetry Protected Topological Order,” Phys. Rev. B80 (2009) 155131, arXiv:0903.1069 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2009 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Coarse-graining renormalization by higher-order singular value decomposition,

    Z. Y. Xie, J. Chen, M. P. Qin, J. W. Zhu, L. P. Yang, and T. Xiang, “Coarse-graining renormalization by higher-order singular value decomposition,” Phys. Rev. B86 no. 4, (2012) 045139, arXiv:1201.1144 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    2012 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Phase transition of the q-state clock model: duality and tensor renormalization,

    J. Chen, H.-J. Liao, H.-D. Xie, X.-J. Han, R.-Z. Huang, S. Cheng, Z.-C. Wei, Z.-Y. Xie, and T. Xiang, “Phase transition of the q-state clock model: duality and tensor renormalization,” Chin. Phys. Lett.34 (2017) 050503, arXiv:1706.03455 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    2017 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Phase transition of four-dimensional Ising model with higher-order tensor renormalization group,

    S. Akiyama, Y. Kuramashi, T. Yamashita, and Y. Yoshimura, “Phase transition of four-dimensional Ising model with higher-order tensor renormalization group,” Phys. Rev. D 100 no. 5, (2019) 054510, arXiv:1906.06060 [hep-lat]

    2019 arXiv

  65. [73]

    SU(2) principal chiral model with tensor renormalization group on a cubic lattice,

    S. Akiyama, R. G. Jha, and J. Unmuth-Yockey, “SU(2) principal chiral model with tensor renormalization group on a cubic lattice,” Phys. Rev. D110 no. 3, (2024) 034519, arXiv:2406.10081 [hep-lat]. – 32 –

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.