Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 3 cited by

This paper constructs the most general relativistic field theory for a phase transition out of a 2+1d topological phase triggered by a single Abelian anyon, and shows the theory is fixed by one integer p.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 19:58 UTC pith:PNL2KJCB

load-bearing objection A systematic and mostly convincing field-theoretic framework for proliferation transitions out of 2+1d TQFTs, with a real gap in the 'most general' uniqueness claim. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2603.00245 v2 pith:PNL2KJCB submitted 2026-02-27 cond-mat.str-el hep-th

Proliferation transitions from a topological phase in 2+1 dimensions

Meng Cheng , Nathan Seiberg This is my paper
classification cond-mat.str-el hep-th
keywords topological phase transitionsAbelian anyonsanyon proliferationChern-Simons-matter theoryone-form global symmetrygauging one-form symmetryAbelian hierarchyfractional quantum Hall states
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper aims to classify, in one framework, all phase transitions out of a bosonic 2+1-dimensional topological phase (a TQFT T) that are triggered by a single Abelian anyon becoming light and proliferating. The authors construct the most general relativistic transition field theory by coupling T to one complex scalar field Φ that creates the anyon, and find that it depends on a single new integer parameter p. For p ≠ 0 the transition connects T to another gapped topological phase, T' = (T ⊠ U(1)_{-pn})/Z_n — the Abelian hierarchy construction realized as a dynamical process. For p = 0 the far side is gapless, and a specific deformation by the local operator O turns the transition into a realization of gauging the one-form symmetry generated by the anyon, T → T/Z_n. If correct, this turns the various proposed Chern-Simons-matter transitions into one universal framework with definite predictions for the phases, symmetries, and response (for instance, a Hall-conductivity jump ℓ²/np).

Core claim

The central claim: the Lagrangian (3.1), L_{T'} + (1/2π)bdc + |D_cΦ|² − μ²|Φ|², is the most general relativistic transition field theory for a transition out of a bosonic 2+1d TQFT T driven by a single Abelian anyon a of order n. It contains exactly one new integer, p, the anomaly of the Z_n^(1) symmetry generated by a (topological spin h(a) = p/2n mod 1). For p ≠ 0 the two phases are T and T' = (T ⊠ U(1)_{-pn})/Z_n, a hierarchy construction. For p = 0 the far phase is gapless; adding the local operator O = Φ^n M_b^n M_c^p (= Φ^n then) gaps it and realizes the gauging T → T/Z_n. Enriching by U(1)_A adds a second integer n_v; if n_v is not divisible by n, the p = 0 gauging transition is incom

What carries the argument

The machinery is a Chern-Simons-matter construction. The anyon a of order n generates a Z_n^(1) one-form symmetry of T with anomaly p; stacking the Chern-Simons theory U(1)_{-pn} and gauging the diagonal symmetry gives T' = (T ⊠ U(1)_{-pn})/Z_n. The duality relation L_{T'} + (1/2π)bdc ↔ L_T embeds both TQFTs in a single Lagrangian; the complex scalar Φ, charged under the U(1) gauge field c, creates the anyon a (its worldline ends on Φ), and the sign of its mass drives the Higgs transition between the phases. The integer p — not only p mod 2n — controls which phases appear. The gauge-invariant operator O = Φ^n M_b^n M_c^p (with monopole insertions) decides whether the p = 0 transition gaps or

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption, flagged in the Introduction (Section 1, pages 5–6) and restated in Section 3, is that the transition is driven by a single Abelian anyon that becomes light and can be described by one complex scalar field in a one-dimensional representation of the gauge group; if several anyons become light together, the anyon is non-Abelian, or the field must be a multiplet, the construction does not apply.

What would settle it

A direct falsifier: exhibit a bosonic 2+1d transition out of a topological phase T in which exactly one Abelian anyon becomes light, and show the other phase cannot be written as T' = (T ⊠ U(1)_{-pn})/Z_n for any integer p, or for p = 0 does not match the predicted gapless phase. A sharper test: in a lattice Z_n gauge theory with matter (the p = 0 case), compute the torus ground-state degeneracy and spectrum in the negative-mass phase with and without the Φ^n deformation — the paper predicts a gapless Goldstone mode coupled to T without it, and a gapped spectrum matching T/Z_n with it.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Every transition satisfying the assumptions — a single light Abelian anyon, one complex scalar — is described by Lagrangian (3.1), so with T, the anyon a, and the integer p fixed, the endpoint and the critical theory are determined.
  • The Abelian hierarchy construction corresponds to a genuine dynamical transition: the Higgs phase of (3.1) is exactly T' = (T ⊠ U(1)_{-pn})/Z_n, so hierarchy states can be reached by proliferating an anyon rather than by hand.
  • For p = 0, the transition theory with the O deformation provides a dynamical realization of gauging an anomaly-free one-form symmetry, connecting T to T/Z_n across a phase transition.
  • The transition theory distinguishes the integers p and n_v, not merely p mod 2n and n_v mod n: two TQFTs that look identical at the topological level can be told apart by the transition, e.g., through the U(1)_B Hall-conductivity jump ℓ²/np.
  • When the anyon a carries fractional U(1)_A charge (n_v not divisible by n), the p = 0 gauging transition is incompatible with a U(1)_A-enriched T: the symmetry is either spontaneously broken in the gapless phase or forces the gauging description to be abandoned.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper's own claims, this construction suggests a classification scheme: for a fixed T, proliferation transitions are parametrized by an Abelian anyon a and two integers (p, n_v), so a systematic census of transitions out of known fractional quantum Hall states becomes a finite bookkeeping problem rather than a case-by-case search.
  • The single-scalar logic points to a natural next step the paper leaves open: replacing the one-dimensional scalar by a multiplet should generate transitions that gauge non-invertible one-form symmetries, and the same construction should carry over to fermionic and electronic (spin_c) topological phases.
  • A concrete, testable extension: in a lattice Z_n gauge theory with matter (the p = 0 case), the paper predicts a gapless Goldstone phase when the Φ^n deformation is absent and a gapped phase with the ground-state degeneracy of T/Z_n when it is present; a numerical study of that transition would directly test the gauging-by-transition claim.
  • The interface built from the transition theory is argued in the paper's outlook to host a c = 1 chiral conformal field theory; if so, the spectrum of such an interface carries a measurable signature of the integer p, which could turn these transitions into tools for engineering and probing topological interfaces.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper constructs a continuum field theory for a phase transition out of a general bosonic 2+1d TQFT T, triggered by a single Abelian anyon a that becomes light. Starting from a single complex scalar Φ coupled to a U(1) gauge field c, and using the duality relation L_{T'} + (1/2π)bdc ↔ L_T, the authors propose the transition Lagrangian (3.1). They claim that, for fixed T and a, the most general such relativistic transition theory depends on only one additional integer p: for p ≠ 0 the two phases are T and T' = (T ⊠ U(1)_{-pn})/Z_n, while for p = 0 the transition leads to a gapless phase or, after a deformation by O = Φ^n, to the gauging of the anomaly-free one-form symmetry generated by a. The paper also analyzes global symmetries, the U(1)_B current and the integer ℓ, Hall response differences, U(1)_A enrichment and its possible incompatibility with the p = 0 gauging transition. Several explicit examples are given, including Abelian K-matrix theories, Jain states, and SU(2)_k.

Significance. If the 'most general' claim can be fully justified, this is a valuable unifying framework: it embeds hierarchy constructions, gauging of one-form symmetries, and specific Chern-Simons-matter transitions in a single formalism. The paper has several concrete, falsifiable predictions, notably the Hall response difference (3.15), the relation between p and n_v and the U(1)_A response (6.12), and explicit spectra such as the SU(2)_k torus states for p = 0. The construction is not fitted to data; p and n_v are determined by TQFT/UV data, not by the examples. The authors also state their scope clearly: the analysis assumes a single complex scalar in a one-dimensional representation and does not cover non-Abelian or multi-critical proliferation. The main weakness is that the central uniqueness argument in §8.1 is not exhaustive, so the strongest claim is not yet rigorously established.

major comments (2)
  1. [§8.1, Eq. (8.2); cf. §3.1, Eq. (3.4)] The proof that (3.1) is the most general transition theory for a single complex scalar is incomplete. The argument assumes the only coupling of Φ to T is through a U(1) gauge field c and one BF term (1/2π)(c−C(β))dγ, but it does not classify all gauge-invariant local terms that do not introduce new degrees of freedom. In particular, an integer Chern-Simons term (K/4π)c dc is gauge invariant and allowed by the stated symmetries. After integrating out ˇb in §3.1, such a term changes the local coefficient in (3.4) from n/(4πp) to (n+Kp)/(4πp), so it modifies the local dynamics. The manuscript sets K = 0 without justification. Unless one proves that K can be absorbed by a field redefinition, or that nonzero K necessarily destabilizes one of the two phases, the 'single additional integer parameter' claim is not established. This is the load-bearing step for the paper's central assertion.
  2. [§3.2.2, Eqs. (3.11)–(3.15)] The normalization of the U(1)_B current and the universal Hall response difference depend on an integer ℓ|L that is asserted to be fixed by 'details of T' but is not computed in general. The examples show two extreme values, ℓ = 1 for Abelian theories and ℓ = L for SU(2)_k, but no closed criterion or proof is given that ℓ is determined solely by the data (T, a) in all cases. Since Eq. (3.15) is advertised as a definite, parameter-free prediction, this gap should be closed or at least explicitly declared as a limitation of the universality claim.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Throughout, but especially §2.1] The reuse of b for the original U(1) field, the twisted field ˇb, and then the new U(1) field b = nˇb is very confusing. The authors acknowledge this in footnote 7, but a less overloaded notation would improve readability.
  2. [§3.2.2, Eq. (3.13)] For negative p the meaning of M_c^p should be stated more explicitly; a reader may wonder whether negative-flux monopole operators are included on the same footing. The text is presumably correct, but the convention is worth spelling out.
  3. [§4.3, Eq. (4.9)] The notation U(1)_B = (U(1) × Z_ℓ)/Z_n is potentially misleading because the quotient is by a diagonal subgroup. A sentence explaining the quotient action would remove ambiguity.
  4. [§8.2 and Appendix A] The reference [57] is listed as 'unpublished (2017-2026)'. Since the p = 0 construction is explicitly attributed to that unpublished work, it would be helpful to state which parts are new here and which parts rely on that unpublished manuscript.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the paper constructs a transition theory from stated TQFT data and derives its phases; the §8.1 uniqueness argument has a possible completeness gap, but that is not a circular reduction.

full rationale

This is a constructive field-theory paper, not a fit or a repackaged prediction. The transition theory (3.1) is written down directly from the input data: the TQFT T, the Abelian anyon a of order n and anomaly p, and a single complex scalar Φ. The two phases are derived rather than assumed: for μ²>0, Φ is massive and the low-energy theory is T; for μ²<0, Φ Higgses c and one obtains T' = (T ⊠ U(1)_-pn)/Z_n. The duality relation (2.17) is established both by integrating out c and by explicit anyon-label arguments, with prior citations [27,30,31,34] serving as checkable published mathematics rather than as the sole load-bearing evidence. Equation (3.15), the Hall-conductivity jump, follows algebraically from the defined current J_B = (ℓ/n)J(Φ) and the local Chern-Simons coefficient n/(4πp); it is not a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The p=0 gauging limit is a direct consequence of the same Lagrangian and is checked in concrete examples (U(1)_8 and SU(2)_4N). The only caveat is that the 'essentially unique' argument in §8.1 assumes the BF-type coupling (8.2) and does not explicitly exclude an extra integer Chern-Simons term ∫c dc for the auxiliary gauge field c; if such a term were allowed, the 'single additional integer p' claim would need modification. This is a completeness/correctness risk, not a circular reduction: the theory is not constructed out of its own conclusions, and no load-bearing self-citation replaces a derivation.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 5 axioms · 1 invented entities

The construction uses standard TQFT and gauging machinery. The only new postulated ingredient is the scalar field Φ; the integers p and n_v are physical inputs, not fitted parameters. No hidden degrees of freedom are introduced beyond the assumptions explicitly stated.

free parameters (2)
  • p
    Integer parameter labeling the transition theory; determined by the anyon spin h(a)=p/2n mod 1. Not fitted, but central to the construction.
  • n_v
    Integer encoding the U(1)_A charge of the anyon; set by the UV coupling, not fitted. It controls the Hall conductivity shift and the p=0 incompatibility.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption The proliferating anyon a is Abelian of order n and becomes light; transition described by a single complex scalar Φ in a one-dimensional representation.
    Central modeling assumption stated in the Abstract and Section 3; excludes non-Abelian, multi-anyon, and multicomponent transitions.
  • domain assumption T is a bosonic TQFT; anyon spin h(a)=p/(2n) with pn∈2Z.
    Standard constraint for bosonic theories; used in Eq. (2.1).
  • standard math One-form symmetry gauging / quotient procedure for anomaly-free Z_n in 2+1d TQFT.
    Used to define T' = (T⊠U(1)_-pn)/Z_n in (2.12) and T = (T⊠T_{n,p})/Z_n in (2.5); reviewed in Appendix A.
  • standard math Particle/vortex duality of the 3d XY model.
    Used in Section 5 to derive the dual description (5.4).
  • domain assumption Relativistic / Lorentz invariance of the transition theory.
    Assumed in Section 3; non-relativistic systems may differ.
invented entities (1)
  • Complex scalar field Φ no independent evidence
    purpose: Creates the chosen Abelian anyon a and drives the proliferation transition via Higgsing.
    Effective field introduced as the central dynamical ingredient; no independent experimental signature outside the model.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 43266 in / 10950 out tokens · 111478 ms · 2026-08-02T19:58:10.041564+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We consider phase transitions out of a general topological phase in $2+1$ dimensions. We assume that the transition is triggered by a single Abelian anyon, which becomes light near the transition and whose worldlines proliferate after the transition. (This proliferation is often referred to as ``condensation.'') We describe the transition using a continuum field theory obtained by coupling the corresponding topological quantum field theory (TQFT) to a single complex scalar field associated with this anyon. With these assumptions, we find the most general relativistic field theory for such a transition. Even though for a given TQFT and a choice of anyon, there are infinitely many such field theories, the transition theory depends on only a single additional integer parameter. We analyze all these theories, their global symmetries, and their phases. In generic cases, the theory after the transition can be related to the original one via an Abelian hierarchy construction. In special cases, the theory after the transition is gapless, and with a particular deformation, it is related to the original TQFT by gauging an anomaly-free one-form global symmetry. We also explore the enrichment of this setup by a global U(1) symmetry. In some cases, enriching the original TQFT is incompatible with the full transition theory. Finally, we demonstrate our construction with many specific examples.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.00245 by Meng Cheng, Nathan Seiberg.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Theories at three different scales. At very short distances, denoted in violet, we [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Characterizing gapped phases by smeared boundary conformal field theories: Duality in unusual ordering with spontaneously broken generalized symmetries

    hep-th 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Gapped phases dual to massless RG flows exhibit unusual structures outside standard boundary CFT modules and typically break non-group-like symmetries, characterized via smeared boundary CFTs with an example in the tr...

  2. Characterizing gapped phases by smeared boundary conformal field theories: Duality in unusual ordering with spontaneously broken generalized symmetries

    hep-th 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Gapped phases dual to massless RG flows in 2D CFTs exhibit unusual ordering via spontaneous breaking of non-group-like symmetries and are characterized using smeared boundary CFTs applied to smeared Ishibashi states.

  3. Characterizing gapped phases by smeared boundary conformal field theories: Duality in unusual ordering with spontaneously broken generalized symmetries

    hep-th 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Framework using smeared boundary CFTs classifies gapped phases dual to massless RG flows, showing they often spontaneously break non-group-like symmetries via unusual module structures outside standard boundary critic...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

98 extracted references · 38 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Witten,Quantum Field Theory and the Jones Polynomial,Commun

    E. Witten,Quantum Field Theory and the Jones Polynomial,Commun. Math. Phys.121(1989) 351–399

    1989

  2. [2]

    Kivelson, D.-H

    S. Kivelson, D.-H. Lee, and S.-C. Zhang,Global phase diagram in the quantum hall effect,Phys. Rev. B46(1992) 2223. 57

    1992

  3. [3]

    Wen and Y.-S

    X.-G. Wen and Y.-S. Wu,Transitions between the quantum hall states and insulators induced by periodic potentials,Phys. Rev. Lett.70(1993), no. 10 1501

    1993

  4. [4]

    W. Chen, M. P. Fisher, and Y.-S. Wu,Mott transition in an anyon gas,Phys. Rev. B48(1993), no. 18 13749

    1993

  5. [5]

    Barkeshli and J

    M. Barkeshli and J. McGreevy,Continuous transition between fractional quantum Hall and superfluid states,Phys. Rev. B89(2014), no. 23 235116, [arXiv:1201.4393]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  6. [6]

    J. Y. Lee, C. Wang, M. P. Zaletel, A. Vishwanath, and Y.-C. He,Emergent multi-flavorqed 3 at the plateau transition between fractional chern insulators: Applications to graphene heterostructures,Phys. Rev. X8(Jul, 2018) 031015

    2018

  7. [7]

    Goldman, R

    H. Goldman, R. Sohal, and E. Fradkin,Landau-Ginzburg Theories of Non-Abelian Quantum Hall States from Non-Abelian Bosonization,Phys. Rev. B100(2019), no. 11 115111, [arXiv:1906.00983]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  8. [8]

    Zou and Y.-C

    L. Zou and Y.-C. He,Field-inducedqcd 3-chern-simons quantum criticalities in kitaev materials,Phys. Rev. Res.2(Jan, 2020) 013072

    2020

  9. [9]

    Goldman, R

    H. Goldman, R. Sohal, and E. Fradkin,Non-Abelian Fermionization and the Landscape of Quantum Hall Phases,Phys. Rev. B102(2020), no. 19 195151, [arXiv:2009.00011]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  10. [10]

    Ma and Y.-C

    R. Ma and Y.-C. He,Emergentqcd 3 quantum phase transitions of fractional chern insulators,Phys. Rev. Res.2(Sep, 2020) 033348

    2020

  11. [11]

    Jensen and A

    K. Jensen and A. Raz,The Fractional Hall hierarchy from duality, arXiv:2412.17761

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  12. [12]

    Song, Y.-H

    X.-Y. Song, Y.-H. Zhang, and T. Senthil,Phase transitions out of quantum hall states in moir´ e materials,Phys. Rev. B109(2024), no. 8 085143

    2024

  13. [13]

    Z. D. Shi and A. Chatterjee,Analytic framework for self-dual criticality inZ k gauge theory with matter, July, 2024. arXiv:2407.07941 [cond-mat, physics:hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  14. [14]

    W. Ji, R. A. Lanzetta, Z. Zhou, and C. Wang,Self-dual Higgs transitions: Toric code and beyond,arXiv:2601.20945

    arXiv

  15. [15]

    T. T. Dumitrescu, P. Niro, and R. Thorngren,From QED 3 to Self-Dual Multicriticality in the Fradkin-Shenker Model,arXiv:2602.23420

    arXiv

  16. [16]

    Elitzur, G

    S. Elitzur, G. W. Moore, A. Schwimmer, and N. Seiberg,Remarks on the Canonical Quantization of the Chern-Simons-Witten Theory,Nucl. Phys. B326(1989) 108–134

    1989

  17. [17]

    G. W. Moore and N. Seiberg,Taming the Conformal Zoo,Phys. Lett. B220(1989) 422–430. 58

    1989

  18. [18]

    Gukov and E

    S. Gukov and E. Witten,Rigid Surface Operators,Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.14 (2010), no. 1 87–178, [arXiv:0804.1561]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  19. [19]

    F. D. M. Haldane,Fractional quantization of the hall effect: A hierarchy of incompressible quantum fluid states,Phys. Rev. Lett.51(Aug, 1983) 605–608

    1983

  20. [20]

    B. I. Halperin,Statistics of quasiparticles and the hierarchy of fractional quantized hall states,Phys. Rev. Lett.52(Apr, 1984) 1583–1586

    1984

  21. [21]

    F. A. Bais and J. K. Slingerland,Condensate induced transitions between topologically ordered phases,Phys. Rev. B79(2009) 045316, [arXiv:0808.0627]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  22. [22]

    Gaiotto, A

    D. Gaiotto, A. Kapustin, N. Seiberg, and B. Willett,Generalized Global Symmetries,JHEP02(2015) 172, [arXiv:1412.5148]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  23. [23]

    Cheng, S

    M. Cheng, S. Musser, A. Raz, N. Seiberg, and T. Senthil,Ordering the topological order in the fractional quantum hall effect,Phys. Rev. B113(Mar, 2026) 115103, [arXiv:2505.14767]

    arXiv 2026

  24. [24]

    Karch and D

    A. Karch and D. Tong,Particle-Vortex Duality from 3d Bosonization,Phys. Rev. X 6(2016), no. 3 031043, [arXiv:1606.01893]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  25. [25]

    Seiberg, T

    N. Seiberg, T. Senthil, C. Wang, and E. Witten,A duality web in 2 + 1 dimensions and condensed matter physics,Annals of Physics374(Nov., 2016) 395–433, [arXiv:1606.01989]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  26. [26]

    Cordova, D

    C. Cordova, D. Garc ´ ıa-Sep´ ulveda, and K. Ohmori,Higgsing Transitions from Topological Field Theory & Non-Invertible Symmetry in Chern-Simons Matter Theories,arXiv:2504.03614

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  27. [27]

    P.-S. Hsin, H. T. Lam, and N. Seiberg,Comments on One-Form Global Symmetries and Their Gauging in 3d and 4d,SciPost Phys.6(2019), no. 3 039, [arXiv:1812.04716]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  28. [28]

    G. W. Moore and N. Seiberg,Classical and Quantum Conformal Field Theory, Commun. Math. Phys.123(1989) 177

    1989

  29. [29]

    Dijkgraaf and E

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

    1990

  30. [30]

    Hsin and N

    P.-S. Hsin and N. Seiberg,Level/rank Duality and Chern-Simons-Matter Theories, JHEP09(2016) 095, [arXiv:1607.07457]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  31. [31]

    Cordova, P.-S

    C. Cordova, P.-S. Hsin, and N. Seiberg,Global Symmetries, Counterterms, and Duality in Chern-Simons Matter Theories with Orthogonal Gauge Groups,SciPost Phys.4(2018), no. 4 021, [arXiv:1711.10008]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  32. [32]

    Lan and X.-G

    T. Lan and X.-G. Wen,Hierarchy construction and non-abelian families of generic topological orders,Phys. Rev. Lett.119(Jul, 2017) 040403. 59

    2017

  33. [33]

    Lan,Matrix formulation for non-Abelian families,Phys

    T. Lan,Matrix formulation for non-Abelian families,Phys. Rev. B100(2019), no. 24 241102, [arXiv:1908.02599]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  34. [34]

    Cheng and C.-M

    M. Cheng and C.-M. Jian,Gauging U(1) symmetry in (2+1)d topological phases, SciPost Phys.12(2022), no. 6 202, [arXiv:2201.07239]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  35. [35]

    Zhang, A

    C. Zhang, A. Vishwanath, and X.-G. Wen,Hierarchy construction for non-abelian fractional quantum hall states via anyon condensation,arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.12068(2024)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  36. [36]

    Z. D. Shi, C. Zhang, and S. Todadri,Doping lattice non-Abelian quantum Hall states,SciPost Phys.19(2025) 150

    2025

  37. [37]

    Etingof, D

    P. Etingof, D. Nikshych, and V. Ostrik,Fusion categories and homotopy theory, Quantum Topology1(2010), no. 3 209–273

    2010

  38. [38]

    Barkeshli, P

    M. Barkeshli, P. Bonderson, M. Cheng, and Z. Wang,Symmetry fractionalization, defects, and gauging of topological phases,Physical Review B100(Sept., 2019) 115147

    2019

  39. [39]

    Davydov,Bogomolov multiplier, double class-preserving automorphisms, and modular invariants for orbifolds,Journal of Mathematical Physics55(2014), no

    A. Davydov,Bogomolov multiplier, double class-preserving automorphisms, and modular invariants for orbifolds,Journal of Mathematical Physics55(2014), no. 9 092305

    2014

  40. [40]

    Kobayashi and M

    R. Kobayashi and M. Barkeshli,Soft symmetries of topological orders,Phys. Rev. B 113(2026), no. 11 115150, [arXiv:2501.03314]

    arXiv 2026

  41. [41]

    Blok and X

    B. Blok and X. G. Wen,Effective Theories of Fractional Quantum Hall Effect at Generic Filling Fractions,Phys. Rev. B42(1990) 8133–8144

    1990

  42. [42]

    Blok and X

    B. Blok and X. G. Wen,Effective theories of fractional quantum Hall effect: The Hierarchy construction,Phys. Rev. B42(1990) 8145–8156

    1990

  43. [43]

    Read,Excitation structure of the hierarchy scheme in the fractional quantum hall effect,Phys

    N. Read,Excitation structure of the hierarchy scheme in the fractional quantum hall effect,Phys. Rev. Lett.65(Sep, 1990) 1502–1505

    1990

  44. [44]

    X. G. Wen and A. Zee,Classification of abelian quantum hall states and matrix formulation of topological fluids,Physical Review B46(1992), no. 4 2290

    1992

  45. [45]

    Bonderson and J

    P. Bonderson and J. K. Slingerland,Fractional quantum hall hierarchy and the second landau level,Phys. Rev. B78(Sep, 2008) 125323

    2008

  46. [46]

    Levin and B

    M. Levin and B. I. Halperin,Collective states of non-abelian quasiparticles in a magnetic field,Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics79 (2009), no. 20 205301

    2009

  47. [47]

    Hermanns,Condensing non-abelian quasiparticles,Phys

    M. Hermanns,Condensing non-abelian quasiparticles,Phys. Rev. Lett.104(Feb,

  48. [48]

    T. H. Hansson, M. Hermanns, S. H. Simon, and S. Viefers,Quantum hall physics: Hierarchies and conformal field theory techniques,Reviews of Modern Physics89 (2017), no. 2 025005

    2017

  49. [49]

    Fidkowski, N

    L. Fidkowski, N. H. Lindner, and N. Tarantino,Symmetry fractionalization and twist defects,New J. Phys.18(2016), no. 3 035006, [arXiv:1506.06754]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  50. [50]

    Closset, T

    C. Closset, T. T. Dumitrescu, G. Festuccia, Z. Komargodski, and N. Seiberg, Comments on Chern-Simons Contact Terms in Three Dimensions,JHEP09(2012) 091, [arXiv:1206.5218]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  51. [51]

    Senthil Unpublished

    T. Senthil Unpublished

  52. [52]

    E. H. Fradkin and S. H. Shenker,Phase Diagrams of Lattice Gauge Theories with Higgs Fields,Phys. Rev. D19(1979) 3682–3697

    1979

  53. [53]

    Banks and E

    T. Banks and E. Rabinovici,Finite Temperature Behavior of the Lattice Abelian Higgs Model,Nucl. Phys. B160(1979) 349–379

    1979

  54. [54]

    Read and S

    N. Read and S. Sachdev,Large-N expansion for frustrated quantum antiferromagnets,Physical Review Letters66(Apr., 1991) 1773–1776

    1991

  55. [55]

    A. V. Chubukov, S. Sachdev, and T. Senthil,Quantum phase transitions in frustrated quantum antiferromagnets,Nucl. Phys. B426(1994), no. 3 601–643

    1994

  56. [56]

    J. B. F. H. S. S. and K. S. J.Phase transitions in topological lattice models via topological symmetry breaking,New Journal of Physics14(2012), no. 1 015004, [arXiv:1012.0317]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  57. [57]

    Barkeshli, M

    M. Barkeshli, M. Cheng, P.-S. Hsin, H. Lam, and perhaps others, unpublished (2017-2026)

    2017

  58. [58]

    Belov and G

    D. Belov and G. W. Moore,Classification of Abelian spin Chern-Simons theories, hep-th/0505235

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  59. [59]

    S. D. Stirling,Abelian Chern-Simons theory with toral gauge group, modular tensor categories, and group categories. PhD thesis, Texas U., Math Dept., 2008. arXiv:0807.2857

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  60. [60]

    Kapustin and N

    A. Kapustin and N. Saulina,Topological boundary conditions in abelian Chern-Simons theory,Nucl. Phys. B845(2011) 393–435, [arXiv:1008.0654]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  61. [61]

    Wen and Y.-S

    X.-G. Wen and Y.-S. Wu,Transitions between the quantum hall states and insulators induced by periodic potentials,Phys. Rev. Lett.70(Mar, 1993) 1501–1504

    1993

  62. [62]

    J. M. Maldacena, G. W. Moore, and N. Seiberg,D-brane charges in five-brane backgrounds,JHEP10(2001) 005, [hep-th/0108152]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  63. [63]

    Banks and N

    T. Banks and N. Seiberg,Symmetries and Strings in Field Theory and Gravity, Phys. Rev. D83(2011) 084019, [arXiv:1011.5120]. 61

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  64. [64]

    Kapustin and N

    A. Kapustin and N. Seiberg,Coupling a QFT to a TQFT and Duality,JHEP04 (2014) 001, [arXiv:1401.0740]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  65. [65]

    J. K. Jain,Composite-fermion approach for the fractional quantum hall effect,Phys. Rev. Lett.63(Jul, 1989) 199–202

    1989

  66. [66]

    J. K. Jain,Composite fermions. Cambridge University Press, 2007

    2007

  67. [67]

    Wen,Topological orders and edge excitations in fractional quantum hall states,Advances in Physics44(1995), no

    X.-G. Wen,Topological orders and edge excitations in fractional quantum hall states,Advances in Physics44(1995), no. 5 405–473

    1995

  68. [68]

    Seiberg and E

    N. Seiberg and E. Witten,Gapped Boundary Phases of Topological Insulators via Weak Coupling,PTEP2016(2016), no. 12 12C101, [arXiv:1602.04251]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  69. [69]

    Goddard, A

    P. Goddard, A. Kent, and D. I. Olive,Virasoro Algebras and Coset Space Models, Phys. Lett. B152(1985) 88–92

    1985

  70. [70]

    Goddard, A

    P. Goddard, A. Kent, and D. I. Olive,Unitary Representations of the Virasoro and Supervirasoro Algebras,Commun. Math. Phys.103(1986) 105–119

    1986

  71. [71]

    E. Witten,SL(2,Z) action on three-dimensional conformal field theories with Abelian symmetry, inFrom Fields to Strings: Circumnavigating Theoretical Physics: A Conference in Tribute to Ian Kogan, pp. 1173–1200, 7, 2003.hep-th/0307041

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  72. [72]

    M. A. Metlitski,S-duality ofu(1)gauge theory withθ=πon non-orientable manifolds: Applications to topological insulators and superconductors,arXiv e-prints(Oct., 2015) arXiv:1510.05663, [arXiv:1510.05663]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  73. [73]

    Kong,Anyon condensation and tensor categories,Nucl

    L. Kong,Anyon condensation and tensor categories,Nucl. Phys. B886(2014) 436–482, [arXiv:1307.8244]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  74. [74]

    Kaidi, Z

    J. Kaidi, Z. Komargodski, K. Ohmori, S. Seifnashri, and S.-H. Shao,Higher central charges and topological boundaries in 2+1-dimensional TQFTs,SciPost Phys.13 (2022), no. 3 067, [arXiv:2107.13091]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  75. [75]

    Yu,Gauging Categorical Symmetries in 3d Topological Orders and Bulk Reconstruction,arXiv:2111.13697

    M. Yu,Gauging Categorical Symmetries in 3d Topological Orders and Bulk Reconstruction,arXiv:2111.13697

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  76. [76]

    Roumpedakis, S

    K. Roumpedakis, S. Seifnashri, and S.-H. Shao,Higher Gauging and Non-invertible Condensation Defects,Commun. Math. Phys.401(2023), no. 3 3043–3107, [arXiv:2204.02407]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  77. [77]

    Cordova and D

    C. Cordova and D. Garc ´ ıa-Sep´ ulveda,Non-Invertible Anyon Condensation and Level-Rank Dualities,arXiv:2312.16317

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  78. [78]

    J. L. Cardy,Operator Content of Two-Dimensional Conformally Invariant Theories,Nucl. Phys. B270(1986) 186–204

    1986

  79. [79]

    Gepner and E

    D. Gepner and E. Witten,String Theory on Group Manifolds,Nucl. Phys. B278 (1986) 493–549. 62

    1986

  80. [80]

    Cappelli, C

    A. Cappelli, C. Itzykson, and J. B. Zuber,Modular invariant partition functions in two dimensions,Nucl. Phys. B280(1987) 445–465

    1987

Showing first 80 references.