pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.04556 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-06 · 🧮 math-ph · math.MP· math.QA· math.SG

Recognition: no theorem link

From BV-BFV Quantization to Reshetikhin-Turaev Invariants

Nima Moshayedi
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 19:40 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math-ph math.MPmath.QAmath.SG
keywords Chern-Simons theoryBV-BFV quantizationReshetikhin-Turaev invariantsderived character stacksshifted symplectic geometryfactorization homologyextended TQFTsmodular tensor categories
0
0 comments X

The pith

The BV-BFV quantization of Chern-Simons theory is equivalent to the Reshetikhin-Turaev invariants as (3-2-1)-extended topological quantum field theories.

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

This paper outlines a program to connect the perturbative BV-BFV quantization of Chern-Simons theory with the non-perturbative Reshetikhin-Turaev invariants of three-manifolds. It does so by invoking factorization homology of E_n-algebras and the derived geometry of character stacks. The central conjecture is that these two constructions define the same extended topological quantum field theory, with the derived character stack Loc_G(Σ) and its shifted symplectic form serving as the bridge. A sympathetic reader would care because such an equivalence would provide a unified framework for understanding both perturbative expansions and exact invariants in topological quantum field theory.

Core claim

The main conjecture asserts a natural equivalence between the BV-BFV and RT constructions as (3-2-1)-extended topological quantum field theories. This identification is mediated by the derived character stack Loc_G(Σ) together with its shifted symplectic structure. The program formulates seven conjectures in total, proposes a proof strategy based on deformation quantization of shifted symplectic stacks, and highlights the role of E_n-Koszul duality in relating perturbative and non-perturbative data, with supporting evidence from abelian, low-genus, and Seifert fibered cases.

What carries the argument

The derived character stack Loc_G(Σ) with its shifted symplectic structure, which is conjectured to mediate the equivalence between the BV-BFV quantization and the Reshetikhin-Turaev construction.

If this is right

  • If correct, the RT invariants would admit a perturbative description via BV-BFV methods.
  • Factorization homology would serve as the mechanism to glue local data into global manifold invariants.
  • The E_2-category from quantization on the disk would reproduce the modular tensor category of the RT theory.
  • Deformation quantization of the shifted symplectic stack would yield the non-perturbative invariants.
  • The framework would clarify connections between Chern-Simons theory and the geometric Langlands program.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • This equivalence might enable the application of resurgence methods to connect perturbative series directly to the exact RT invariants.
  • It could offer a quantization-based approach to aspects of the geometric Langlands correspondence.
  • Further evidence could be sought by explicit computations in higher-genus cases or for non-Seifert manifolds.
  • The construction might extend to higher-dimensional or categorified versions of topological invariants.

Load-bearing premise

The modular tensor category underlying the Reshetikhin-Turaev construction arises as the E_2-category coming from the BV-BFV quantization of Chern-Simons theory on the disk.

What would settle it

Explicit computation of the invariants for a specific non-abelian Seifert fibered manifold using both the BV-BFV method and the RT construction, showing a mismatch in the resulting values.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.04556 by Nima Moshayedi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic overview of the program. The BV-BFV functor (top left) is an ordinary, perturbative TQFT valued in Vectℏ. The RT construc￾tion (top right) is a (3-2-1)-extended TQFT valued in 2-Vect. The Main Conjecture asserts that the BV-BFV data can be promoted to a (3-2-1)- extended TQFT that agrees with RT. Solid arrows indicate connections supported by existing results; dashed arrows indicate conjectural i… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The BV-BFV framework, illustrated for a cobordism M : Σin → Σ1⊔Σ2. The bulk 3-manifold M (blue shading) carries BV data with a degree (−1) symplectic structure; each boundary component (red circles) carries BFV data with a degree 0 symplectic structure. The restriction map π connects bulk and boundary fields, and the BV-BFV axiom states that the failure of the classical master equation in the bulk is preci… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The RT invariant via surgery. (a) A closed 3-manifold M is presented as surgery on a framed link L = L1 ∪ L2 in S 3 , with each com￾ponent colored by a simple object Vj of the MTC. (b) The RT invariant is computed by summing the colored link invariant JL(V⃗ ) over all labelings by simple objects, weighted by quantum dimensions, and corrected by nor￾malization factors depending on the signature σ(L) and the… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Top: Factorization homology as a “continuous tensor product.” The E2-algebra A is placed on each disk embedded in the surface Σ; the col￾imit over all disk embeddings produces the global invariant ˜ Σ A. Bottom: The ⊗-excision property (Theorem 4.6): cutting Σ along a codimension-1 submanifold N expresses the factorization homology as a relative tensor product over the data assigned to N × R. 4.3. Low-dime… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The PTVV hierarchy of shifted symplectic structures on char￾acter stacks (Theorem 5.6). A compact oriented d-manifold Σ gives rise to LocG(Σ) with a (2 − d)-shifted symplectic structure. The three cases d = 1, 2, 3 correspond precisely to the BFV, classical symplectic, and BV structures in the BV-BFV formalism. This dimensional pattern, produced by a single mechanism (AKSZ transgression of the Killing form… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The boundary decomposition of the cylinder D2 × [0, 1]. The temporal boundary components D2 × {0, 1} (blue) are codimension-1 sur￾faces to which the BFV formalism assigns state spaces. The lateral bound￾ary S 1 × [0, 1] (red) contains the codimension-2 corner S 1 = ∂D2 , to which the extended theory assigns the category B (k) CS of boundary conditions. The objects of B (k) CS are the choices of boundary co… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The two operations generating the E2-structure on B (k) CS . (a) Vertical composition: stacking two cylinders and gluing along the interme￾diate disk D2 via the BFV pairing gives the E1-structure. (b) Braiding: two smaller disks carrying boundary conditions V, W are embedded in a larger disk D2 ; the trinion (complement) defines V ⊗ W, and exchanging the disks by a half-rotation produces cV,W . is the phys… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The Lagrangian correspondence associated to a cobordism (Conjecture 6.14). Top: At the classical level, a 3-cobordism M : Σ1 → Σ2 gives a “roof” diagram. The restriction maps from LocG(M) to LocG(Σ1) × LocG(Σ2) − carry a Lagrangian structure (Theorem 5.9, due to Calaque). Bottom: The conjecture asserts that quantizing this Lagrangian correspondence produces the linear map ZRT(M) : VRT(Σ1) → VRT(Σ2) between… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The Koszul reconstruction (Conjecture 7.4). Each flat connec￾tion [Ai ] ∈ LocG(M) has a formal neighborhood Ob[Ai] , reconstructed from the perturbative BV-BFV data around Ai via E0-Koszul duality. The for￾mal neighborhoods are glued together by transition maps that encode the non-perturbative tunneling between flat connections (conjecturally identi￾fied with the Stokes data of resurgence, Conjecture 8.3).… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The solid torus example (Example 7.6). The character variety LocSL2 (S 1×D2 )cl is parametrized by the trace t = z+z −1 of the holonomy. At generic points (green), the stabilizer is the maximal torus C ∗ and the perturbative data is trivial. At t = ±2 (red), the stabilizer jumps to all of SL2 and the perturbative algebra Obsq A0 = C • (g)[[ℏ]] is non-trivial. The Koszul reconstruction (Conjecture 7.4) ass… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We propose a program for bridging the gap between the perturbative BV-BFV quantization of Chern-Simons theory and the non-perturbative Reshetikhin-Turaev (RT) invariants of 3-manifolds, passing through factorization homology of $\mathbb{E}_n$-algebras and the derived algebraic geometry of character stacks. We conjecture that the modular tensor category underlying the RT construction arises as the $\mathbb{E}_2$-category from BV-BFV quantization of Chern-Simons theory on the disk, with the derived character stack $\mathrm{Loc}_G(\Sigma)$ and its shifted symplectic structure mediating the proposed identification. We formulate seven conjectures, including a main conjecture asserting natural equivalence of the BV-BFV and RT constructions as (3-2-1)-extended topological quantum field theories, develop a proof strategy via deformation quantization of shifted symplectic stacks, and clarify the role of $\mathbb{E}_n$-Koszul duality in translating between perturbative and non-perturbative data. Supporting evidence is examined in the abelian, low-genus, and Seifert fibered cases. Connections to resurgence, categorification, and the geometric Langlands program are discussed as further motivation, though significant technical gaps remain open.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a program to bridge the perturbative BV-BFV quantization of Chern-Simons theory with the non-perturbative Reshetikhin-Turaev invariants of 3-manifolds, via factorization homology of E_n-algebras and the derived algebraic geometry of character stacks. It formulates seven conjectures, the principal one asserting a natural equivalence between the BV-BFV and RT constructions as (3-2-1)-extended TQFTs, mediated by the derived character stack Loc_G(Σ) and its shifted symplectic structure. A proof strategy based on deformation quantization of shifted symplectic stacks and E_n-Koszul duality is outlined, with supporting evidence restricted to the abelian, low-genus, and Seifert fibered cases.

Significance. If the conjectures can be established, the work would furnish a substantive conceptual link between perturbative and non-perturbative aspects of topological quantum field theories, with possible ramifications for the geometric Langlands program, categorification, and resurgence. The explicit statement of the conjectures together with the identification of remaining technical gaps provides a clear roadmap that could guide subsequent research.

major comments (2)
  1. The main conjecture (formulated in the body of the paper) asserts equivalence of the two constructions as extended TQFTs, yet the only supporting evidence consists of checks in the abelian, low-genus, and Seifert cases; no general derivation or verification is supplied, leaving the central claim dependent on an unproven extension from these special situations.
  2. The proof strategy via deformation quantization of shifted symplectic stacks (outlined after the conjectures) relies on the assumption that the modular tensor category of the RT construction arises as the E_2-category obtained from BV-BFV quantization on the disk; the manuscript acknowledges that this step remains open in the non-abelian setting and does not provide a concrete reduction or test that would make the strategy load-bearing.
minor comments (2)
  1. The abstract refers to seven conjectures without enumerating them; a short numbered list in the introduction would improve navigation for readers.
  2. Notation for the E_2-category and its relation to the modular tensor category is introduced without an explicit cross-reference to the relevant factorization-homology construction; adding one or two standard citations would clarify the passage from perturbative data to the non-perturbative category.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and for the constructive comments on its scope and limitations. We address each major comment below, clarifying the conjectural nature of the work and the status of the evidence provided.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The main conjecture (formulated in the body of the paper) asserts equivalence of the two constructions as extended TQFTs, yet the only supporting evidence consists of checks in the abelian, low-genus, and Seifert cases; no general derivation or verification is supplied, leaving the central claim dependent on an unproven extension from these special situations.

    Authors: We agree that the central conjecture is supported only by explicit checks in the abelian, low-genus, and Seifert fibered cases, as we state in the abstract and in the section examining supporting evidence. The manuscript presents the equivalence as a conjecture within a broader program, not as a proven theorem, and explicitly notes that significant technical gaps remain. We will revise the introduction and the statement of the main conjecture to emphasize more clearly that the general case is conjectural and that the special-case verifications do not constitute a general derivation. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The proof strategy via deformation quantization of shifted symplectic stacks (outlined after the conjectures) relies on the assumption that the modular tensor category of the RT construction arises as the E_2-category obtained from BV-BFV quantization on the disk; the manuscript acknowledges that this step remains open in the non-abelian setting and does not provide a concrete reduction or test that would make the strategy load-bearing.

    Authors: We concur that the key step identifying the E_2-category from BV-BFV quantization with the modular tensor category of the RT construction remains open in the non-abelian setting, as already acknowledged in the manuscript. The outlined strategy is intended as a conceptual roadmap rather than a completed argument. We will expand the discussion following the conjectures to include additional remarks on possible concrete tests in specific non-abelian examples and on the role of E_n-Koszul duality in bridging the perturbative and non-perturbative regimes, while preserving the conjectural status of this identification. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; explicitly conjectural with no derivations or self-referential steps

full rationale

The paper formulates seven conjectures linking BV-BFV quantization to RT invariants via factorization homology and character stacks, but asserts no proofs or derivations. It states significant technical gaps remain and restricts evidence to abelian/low-genus/Seifert cases. No load-bearing equations, fitted parameters, or self-citations reduce any claim to its own inputs by construction. The framework is self-contained as a proposal without circular reductions.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on several unproven identifications between existing structures; no new free parameters are introduced, but the conjectures themselves function as ad-hoc assumptions.

axioms (2)
  • ad hoc to paper The modular tensor category underlying RT arises as the E_2-category from BV-BFV quantization on the disk
    This identification is the load-bearing step of the main conjecture.
  • ad hoc to paper Deformation quantization of shifted symplectic stacks translates between perturbative and non-perturbative data
    Invoked as the proposed proof strategy.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5524 in / 1359 out tokens · 49428 ms · 2026-05-10T19:40:49.607521+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

67 extracted references · 67 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Arinkin, D

    D. Arinkin, D. Gaitsgory,Singular support of coherent sheaves and the geometric Langlands conjec- ture, Selecta Math. (N.S.)21(2015), 1–199

    work page 2015

  2. [2]

    Y. Ai, L. Kong, H. Zheng,Topological orders and factorization homology, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 21(2017), no. 8, 1845–1894

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    Ayala, J

    D. Ayala, J. Francis,Factorization homology of topological manifolds, J. Topol.8(2015), no. 4, 1045–1084

    work page 2015

  4. [4]

    Ayala, J

    D. Ayala, J. Francis, H. L. Tanaka,Factorization homology of stratified spaces, Selecta Math. (N.S.) 23(2017), no. 1, 293–362

    work page 2017

  5. [5]

    Axelrod, I

    S. Axelrod, I. M. Singer,Chern–Simons perturbation theory. II, J. Differential Geom.39(1994), no. 1, 173–213

    work page 1994

  6. [6]

    J. E. Andersen,Asymptotic faithfulness of the quantumSU(n)representations of the mapping class groups, Ann. of Math.163(2006), 347–368. 58 N. MOSHAYEDI

    work page 2006

  7. [7]

    J. E. Andersen,The Witten–Reshetikhin–Turaev invariants of finite order mapping tori I, J. Reine Angew. Math.681(2013), 1–38

    work page 2013

  8. [8]

    J. E. Andersen, K. Ueno,Abelian conformal field theory and determinant bundles, Internat. J. Math. 18(2007), no. 8, 919–993

    work page 2007

  9. [9]

    Bakalov, A

    B. Bakalov, A. Kirillov, Jr.,Lectures on Tensor Categories and Modular Functors, University Lecture Series, vol. 21, AMS, 2001

    work page 2001

  10. [10]

    Bar-Natan,On the Vassiliev knot invariants, Topology34(1995), no

    D. Bar-Natan,On the Vassiliev knot invariants, Topology34(1995), no. 2, 423–472

    work page 1995

  11. [11]

    R. Bott, A. S. Cattaneo,Integral invariants of 3-manifolds, J. Differential Geom.48(1998), no. 1, 91–133

    work page 1998

  12. [12]

    Ben-Zvi, A

    D. Ben-Zvi, A. Brochier, D. Jordan,Integrating quantum groups over surfaces, J. Topol.11(2018), no. 4, 874–917

    work page 2018

  13. [13]

    Ben-Zvi, A

    D. Ben-Zvi, A. Brochier, D. Jordan,Quantum character varieties and braided module categories, Selecta Math. (N.S.)24(2018), no. 5, 4711–4748

    work page 2018

  14. [14]

    Ben-Zvi, D

    D. Ben-Zvi, D. Nadler,Betti geometric Langlands, Proc. Sympos. Pure Math.97(2018), 3–41

    work page 2018

  15. [15]

    Ben-Zvi, D

    D. Ben-Zvi, D. Nadler,Loop spaces and representations, Duke Math. J.162(2013), no. 9, 1587–1619

    work page 2013

  16. [16]

    Brochier, D

    A. Brochier, D. Jordan, N. Snyder,On dualizability of braided tensor categories, Compositio Math. 157(2021), 435–483

    work page 2021

  17. [17]

    Brochier, D

    A. Brochier, D. Jordan, P. Safronov, N. Snyder,Invertible braided tensor categories, Algebr. Geom. Topol.21(2021), 2107–2140

    work page 2021

  18. [18]

    Calaque,Lagrangian structures on mapping stacks and semi-classical TFTs, Contemp

    D. Calaque,Lagrangian structures on mapping stacks and semi-classical TFTs, Contemp. Math. 643(2015), 1–23

    work page 2015

  19. [19]

    Calaque,Shifted cotangent stacks are shifted symplectic, Ann

    D. Calaque,Shifted cotangent stacks are shifted symplectic, Ann. Fac. Sci. Toulouse Math.28(2019), no. 1, 67–90

    work page 2019

  20. [20]

    Calaque, T

    D. Calaque, T. Pantev, B. To¨ en, M. Vaqui´ e, G. Vezzosi,Shifted Poisson structures and deformation quantization, J. Topol.10(2017), 483–584

    work page 2017

  21. [21]

    A. S. Cattaneo, P. Mnev, N. Reshetikhin,Classical BV theories on manifolds with boundary, Com- mun. Math. Phys.332(2014), 535–603

    work page 2014

  22. [22]

    A. S. Cattaneo, P. Mnev, N. Reshetikhin,Semiclassical quantization of classical field theories, in: Mathematical Aspects of Quantum Field Theories, Springer, 2015, 275–324

    work page 2015

  23. [23]

    A. S. Cattaneo, P. Mnev, N. Reshetikhin,Perturbative quantum gauge theories on manifolds with boundary, Commun. Math. Phys.357(2018), 631–730

    work page 2018

  24. [24]

    A. S. Cattaneo, P. Mnev, N. Reshetikhin,A cellular topological field theory, Commun. Math. Phys. 374(2020), 1229–1320

    work page 2020

  25. [25]

    Skein (3+1)-TQFTs from Non-Semisimple Ribbon Categories

    F. Costantino, N. Geer, B. Ha¨ ıoun, B. Patureau-Mirand,Skein(3+1)-TQFTs from non-semisimple ribbon categories, arXiv:2306.03225, 2023

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  26. [26]

    Costello, O

    K. Costello, O. Gwilliam,Factorization Algebras in Quantum Field Theory, Vol. 1, Cambridge University Press, 2017

    work page 2017

  27. [27]

    Costello, O

    K. Costello, O. Gwilliam,Factorization Algebras in Quantum Field Theory, Vol. 2, Cambridge University Press, 2021

    work page 2021

  28. [28]

    Costello, ``Supersymmetric gauge theory and the Yangian,'' [arXiv:1303.2632 [hep-th]]

    K. Costello,Supersymmetric gauge theory and the Yangian, arXiv:1303.2632, 2013

    work page arXiv 2013

  29. [29]

    De Renzi, A

    M. De Renzi, A. M. Gainutdinov, N. Geer, B. Patureau-Mirand, I. Runkel,3-dimensional TQFTs from non-semisimple modular categories, Selecta Math. (N.S.)28(2022), no. 2, Paper No. 42

    work page 2022

  30. [30]

    C. L. Douglas, C. Schommer-Pries, N. Snyder,The balanced tensor product of module categories, Kyoto J. Math.59(2019), no. 1, 167–179

    work page 2019

  31. [31]

    Etingof, D

    P. Etingof, D. Kazhdan,Quantization of Lie bialgebras, I, Selecta Math. (N.S.)2(1996), no. 1, 1–41

    work page 1996

  32. [32]

    Etingof, S

    P. Etingof, S. Gelaki, D. Nikshych, V. Ostrik,Tensor Categories, Mathematical Surveys and Mono- graphs, vol. 205, AMS, 2015

    work page 2015

  33. [33]

    D. S. Freed, M. J. Hopkins, J. Lurie, C. Teleman,Topological quantum field theories from compact Lie groups, CRM Proceedings, 2010, 367–403

    work page 2010

  34. [34]

    Francis, D

    J. Francis, D. Gaitsgory,Chiral Koszul duality, Selecta Math. (N.S.)18(2012), no. 1, 27–87

    work page 2012

  35. [35]

    D. S. Freed,Classical Chern–Simons theory, Part 1, Adv. Math.113(1995), 237–303

    work page 1995

  36. [36]

    Gaitsgory,Quantum Langlands correspondence, arXiv:1601.05279, 2016

    D. Gaitsgory,Quantum Langlands correspondence, arXiv:1601.05279, 2016

    work page arXiv 2016

  37. [37]

    Gaitsgory, N

    D. Gaitsgory, N. Rozenblyum,A Study in Derived Algebraic Geometry, Math. Surveys and Mono- graphs, vol. 221, AMS, 2017

    work page 2017

  38. [38]

    Gaitsgory, J

    D. Gaitsgory, J. Lurie,Weil’s Conjecture for Function Fields, Vol. 1, Ann. Math. Studies, vol. 199, Princeton, 2019. FROM BV-BFV QUANTIZATION TO RT INVARIANTS 59

    work page 2019

  39. [39]

    Garoufalidis, J

    S. Garoufalidis, J. Gu, M. Mari˜ no,Peacock patterns and resurgence in complex Chern–Simons theory, Res. Math. Sci.10(2023), Paper No. 29

    work page 2023

  40. [40]

    Garoufalidis,On the characteristic and deformation varieties of a knot, Geom

    S. Garoufalidis,On the characteristic and deformation varieties of a knot, Geom. Topol. Monogr.7 (2004), 291–309

    work page 2004

  41. [41]

    Gukov, M

    S. Gukov, M. Mari˜ no, P. Putrov,Resurgence in complex Chern–Simons theory, arXiv:1605.07615, 2016

    work page arXiv 2016

  42. [42]

    Gukov, D

    S. Gukov, D. Pei, P. Putrov, C. Vafa,BPS spectra and 3-manifold invariants, J. Knot Theory Ramif. 29(2020), no. 2, 2040003

    work page 2020

  43. [43]

    Gukov,Three-dimensional quantum gravity, Chern–Simons theory, and the A-polynomial, Com- mun

    S. Gukov,Three-dimensional quantum gravity, Chern–Simons theory, and the A-polynomial, Com- mun. Math. Phys.255(2005), 577–627

    work page 2005

  44. [44]

    Gwilliam, K

    O. Gwilliam, K. Rejzner,Relating nets and factorization algebras of observables, Commun. Math. Phys.373(2020), 107–174

    work page 2020

  45. [45]

    Gwilliam, R

    O. Gwilliam, R. Haugseng,Linear Batalin–Vilkovisky quantization as a functor of∞-categories, Selecta Math. (N.S.)24(2018), 1247–1313

    work page 2018

  46. [46]

    Ha¨ ıoun,Non-semisimple WRT at the boundary of Crane-Yetter, arXiv:2503.20905, 2025

    B. Ha¨ ıoun,Non-semisimple WRT at the boundary of Crane-Yetter, arXiv:2503.20905, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  47. [47]

    S. K. Hansen,Reshetikhin–Turaev invariants of Seifert 3-manifolds for classical simple Lie algebras, J. Knot Theory Ramif.13(2004), 617–668

    work page 2004

  48. [48]

    N. J. Hitchin,Flat connections and geometric quantization, Comm. Math. Phys.131(1990), 347– 380

    work page 1990

  49. [49]

    L. C. Jeffrey,Chern–Simons–Witten invariants of lens spaces and torus bundles, and the semiclas- sical approximation, Commun. Math. Phys.147(1992), 563–604

    work page 1992

  50. [50]

    Kirillov, Jr., Y

    A. Kirillov, Jr., Y. H. Tham,Factorization homology and 4D TQFT, Quantum Topol.13(2022), no. 3, 407–454

    work page 2022

  51. [51]

    Kontsevich,Feynman diagrams and low-dimensional topology, Progr

    M. Kontsevich,Feynman diagrams and low-dimensional topology, Progr. Math.120, Birkh¨ auser, 1994, 97–121

    work page 1994

  52. [52]

    Lurie,Higher Algebra, available athttps://www.math.ias.edu/ ~lurie/papers/HA.pdf, 2017

    J. Lurie,Higher Algebra, available athttps://www.math.ias.edu/ ~lurie/papers/HA.pdf, 2017

    work page 2017

  53. [53]

    Lurie,On the classification of topological field theories, Current Developments in Mathematics 2008, International Press, 2009, 129–280

    J. Lurie,On the classification of topological field theories, Current Developments in Mathematics 2008, International Press, 2009, 129–280

    work page 2008

  54. [54]

    Lurie,Spectral Algebraic Geometry, available athttps://www.math.ias.edu/ ~lurie/papers/ SAG-rootfile.pdf

    J. Lurie,Spectral Algebraic Geometry, available athttps://www.math.ias.edu/ ~lurie/papers/ SAG-rootfile.pdf

    work page

  55. [55]

    Mari˜ no,Chern–Simons theory, matrix integrals, and perturbative three-manifold invariants, Com- mun

    M. Mari˜ no,Chern–Simons theory, matrix integrals, and perturbative three-manifold invariants, Com- mun. Math. Phys.253(2005), 25–49

    work page 2005

  56. [56]

    Melani, P

    V. Melani, P. Safronov,Derived coisotropic structures II: stacks and quantization, Selecta Math. (N.S.)24(2018), no. 4, 3119–3173

    work page 2018

  57. [57]

    Pantev, B

    T. Pantev, B. To¨ en, M. Vaqui´ e, G. Vezzosi,Shifted symplectic structures, Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes ´Etudes Sci.117(2013), 271–328

    work page 2013

  58. [58]

    D. B. Ray and I. M. Singer,R-Torsion and the Laplacian on Riemannian Manifolds, Adv. Math.7 (1971), 145–210

    work page 1971

  59. [59]

    Reshetikhin, V

    N. Reshetikhin, V. G. Turaev,Invariants of 3-manifolds via link polynomials and quantum groups, Invent. Math.103(1991), 547–597

    work page 1991

  60. [60]

    Safronov,Poisson reduction as a coisotropic intersection, Higher Structures1(2017), 87–121

    P. Safronov,Poisson reduction as a coisotropic intersection, Higher Structures1(2017), 87–121

    work page 2017

  61. [61]

    Safronov,Poisson-Lie structures as shifted Poisson structures, Adv

    P. Safronov,Poisson-Lie structures as shifted Poisson structures, Adv. Math.338(2018), 117–160

    work page 2018

  62. [62]

    Safronov,Braces and Poisson additivity, Compositio Math.154(2018), 1698–1745

    P. Safronov,Braces and Poisson additivity, Compositio Math.154(2018), 1698–1745

    work page 2018

  63. [63]

    Safronov,Shifted geometric quantization, J

    P. Safronov,Shifted geometric quantization, J. Geom. Phys.169(2021), 104361

    work page 2021

  64. [64]

    Scheimbauer,Factorization Homology as a Fully Extended Topological Field Theory, Ph.D

    C. Scheimbauer,Factorization Homology as a Fully Extended Topological Field Theory, Ph.D. thesis, ETH Z¨ urich, 2014

    work page 2014

  65. [65]

    To¨ en, G

    B. To¨ en, G. Vezzosi,Homotopical algebraic geometry I: Topos theory, Adv. Math.193(2005), 257– 372

    work page 2005

  66. [66]

    V. G. Turaev,Quantum Invariants of Knots and 3-Manifolds, de Gruyter, 1994

    work page 1994

  67. [67]

    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. Institut f ¨ur Mathematik, Universit ¨at Z ¨urich, Winterthurerstrasse 190 CH-8057 Z ¨urich Email address, N. Moshayedi:nima.moshayedi@math.uzh.ch

    work page 1989