pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.07041 · v1 · pith:SIDOLAQTnew · submitted 2026-06-05 · ❄️ cond-mat.str-el · cond-mat.stat-mech· hep-th· math-ph· math.MP

Nonlinear sigma models, antiperiodic boundary conditions, spin chains, and 't Hooft anomalies

Nicholas Read , Hubert Saleur This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 20:55 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.stat-mechhep-thmath-phmath.MP
keywords nonlinear sigma modelt Hooft anomalyspin chainsantiperiodic boundary conditionstopological termZ2 gaugingO(3) modelRP2 target space
0
0 comments X

The pith

The O(3) nonlinear sigma model cannot be gauged for its Z2 inversion symmetry when the topological angle Θ equals an odd multiple of π, because of an 't Hooft anomaly.

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

The paper studies the O(3) nonlinear sigma model with topological coefficient Θ and its correspondence to antiferromagnetic spin chains of spin S. Antiperiodic boundary conditions insert a Z2 flux associated with the inversion symmetry that sends the three-component field n to minus n. Summing over periodic and antiperiodic conditions in each direction would gauge this symmetry. The gauging succeeds only when (-1) raised to Θ over π equals plus one; when it equals minus one the partition function with antiperiodic conditions is not gauge invariant and the sum cannot be made modular invariant. Consequently the sigma model whose target space is RP2, the quotient of the two-sphere by this Z2, does not exist for Θ equal to π modulo 2π. Parallel statements hold for sigma models with other semisimple Lie-group symmetries, with the sign now fixed by the square of the time-reversal operator on one spin.

Core claim

When (-1)^{Θ/π} = -1 the partition function of the sigma model with antiperiodic boundary conditions exists but fails to be invariant under gauge transformations of the Z2 gauge field that implements the inversion symmetry n to -n. Therefore the sum over the two boundary conditions cannot be rendered modular invariant. The would-be gauged theory is the nonlinear sigma model with target space RP2 congruent to S2/Z2, which therefore does not exist for Θ = π mod 2π. The same obstruction appears in the spin-chain description when the number of sites is odd.

What carries the argument

Antiperiodic boundary conditions on the sigma model, which insert a Z2 flux through the spacetime torus for the inversion symmetry n → -n; their failure to produce a gauge-invariant partition function precisely when (-1)^{Θ/π} = -1 detects the 't Hooft anomaly.

If this is right

  • Semiclassical quantization of the spin chain with odd N yields ground-state crystal momenta that depend at leading order only on N modulo 4 and 2S modulo 2.
  • The partition function with antiperiodic boundaries cannot be summed to a modular-invariant result when the anomaly condition holds.
  • For a large class of spin chains and sigma models the anomaly is controlled by the square of the time-reversal operator on a single spin, whose sign is fixed by the coefficients of the topological terms.
  • The gauged theory with target RP2 is inconsistent exactly when Θ = π mod 2π.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Lattice models whose continuum limit would be the gauged RP2 sigma model may fail to exist for topological angles satisfying the anomaly condition.
  • The boundary-condition test supplies a practical diagnostic for whether other discrete symmetries of sigma models or spin chains can be gauged without obstruction.
  • The same logic may extend to sigma models on higher-dimensional tori or with additional discrete symmetries whose gauging would produce different quotient target spaces.

Load-bearing premise

Antiperiodic boundary conditions correspond exactly to a Z2 flux for the inversion symmetry n to -n, so that summing over the two boundary conditions implements gauging of that symmetry.

What would settle it

A direct evaluation of how the antiperiodic partition function transforms under a constant Z2 gauge transformation when Θ equals π; a nontrivial phase would confirm the anomaly while invariance when Θ equals 0 or 2π would show the gauging is possible.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.07041 by Hubert Saleur, Nicholas Read.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: A cap (shaded dark) is attached to the spacetime manifold (here, a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The left part shows a rectangle with AP boundary conditions on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The case of a branch cut that winds twice in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: An example of ground-state texture with ⃗n0 in the 1 direction, and a semi-circular arc in the 12 plane. To complete the derivation of the “effective” theory of the motion on the collective coordinate space, we should consider once again the action with which we defined the model. At small g, we can assume that, as a function of x at each t, ⃗n(x, t) has one of the forms above, and the point in the collect… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: A standard texture in the spin chain with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p043_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Vertices of the 6 vertex model. The corresponding weights are [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p063_6.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We consider two sets of related models: initially, these are $SU(2)$ antiferromagnetic spin chains with $N$ sites of spin $S$, and the $O(3)$ nonlinear sigma model in two dimensions with topological coefficient $\Theta$ a multiple of $\pi$ (and later, the extensions of these with any semisimple Lie group symmetry). It is known that, in a continuum description, the low-energy behavior of the spin chain is given by the sigma model with $\Theta=2\pi S$. We study these models with $N$ odd and with antiperiodic (A) boundary condition (b.c.), respectively, which correspond. The A b.c. in the sigma model involves the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ inversion symmetry $\vec{n}\to-\vec{n}$, and amounts to a flux of a $\mathbb{Z}_2$ gauge field through a spacetime torus; summing over the two b.c.s for each direction would amount to gauging the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ inversion symmetry. We show directly that, if and only if $(-1)^{\Theta/\pi}=-1$, the gauging cannot be carried out; there is an 't Hooft anomaly. The partition function for the A b.c. exists, but is not gauge invariant; consequently, the sum over b.c.s cannot be made modular invariant. The gauged model would be a sigma model with target space $\mathbb{R}\mathbb{P}^2\cong \mathbb{S}^2/\mathbb{Z}_2$, and hence this model does not exist for $\Theta=\pi$ (mod $2\pi$). A related result is that, using semiclassical quantization, in the spin chain we obtain the known values of the ground-state crystal momentum, which at leading order depend only on $N$ modulo $4$ and $2S$ modulo $2$. For a large class of spin chains and associated sigma models we find similar results, but now $(-1)^{\Theta/\pi}$ is replaced by the value $\pm 1$ of the square of the time-reversal operator acting on a single spin, which is still determined by the coefficients of the topological terms, in a way that depends on the symmetry group.

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 paper studies SU(2) antiferromagnetic spin chains with odd N and the O(3) nonlinear sigma model (NLSM) in 2D with topological angle Θ a multiple of π (and generalizations to other semisimple groups). It identifies antiperiodic boundary conditions (A b.c.) on the NLSM with insertion of Z2 flux for the inversion symmetry n → -n, such that summing over periodic and antiperiodic b.c.s implements gauging of this symmetry. The central claim is that this gauging is obstructed by an 't Hooft anomaly if and only if (-1)^{Θ/π} = -1 (i.e., Θ = π mod 2π), because the A b.c. partition function exists but is not gauge invariant, preventing a modular-invariant sum; equivalently, the gauged model with target RP² ≅ S²/Z₂ does not exist for these Θ values. A related semiclassical result reproduces the known ground-state crystal momenta of the spin chains (depending on N mod 4 and 2S mod 2).

Significance. If the boundary-condition-to-flux identification holds without extraneous phases, the result supplies a direct path-integral demonstration of an 't Hooft anomaly obstructing gauging in these sigma models, with immediate implications for the non-existence of the RP² target-space model at Θ = π mod 2π. The work also recovers known spin-chain momentum quantization at leading semiclassical order and extends the anomaly criterion to other groups via the square of the time-reversal operator. These connections between lattice models, continuum anomalies, and modular invariance are potentially useful for classifying symmetry-protected phases.

major comments (2)
  1. [abstract and paragraph on A b.c. and Z2 gauge field] The paragraph on A b.c. and Z2 gauge field (and the abstract statement that A b.c. 'amounts to a flux of a Z2 gauge field'): the identification of antiperiodic boundary conditions with Z2 flux insertion for the inversion symmetry n → -n is asserted directly, but the explicit path-integral map or operator equivalence (including any phase contributed by the Θ term under the b.c. change) is not exhibited. This map is load-bearing for the claim that non-invariance of the A b.c. partition function demonstrates an anomaly rather than a mismatch in the identification itself.
  2. [abstract] The statement that 'summing over the two b.c.s for each direction would amount to gauging': while the topological phase factor (-1)^{Θ/π} is derived, the argument that the resulting sum cannot be made modular invariant (and hence that the gauged RP² model does not exist) requires showing that no additional counterterms or redefinitions of the measure can restore invariance; this step is central to the non-existence conclusion but is stated at the level of the abstract without an explicit modular-transformation calculation.
minor comments (2)
  1. Notation for the topological coefficient is introduced as 'Θ a multiple of π' but later used as Θ = π (mod 2π); a single consistent definition early in the text would aid readability.
  2. The semiclassical quantization result for ground-state crystal momentum is presented as 'known values' recovered at leading order; a brief comparison table or explicit formula for the momentum shift would make the agreement more transparent.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript to incorporate clarifications where needed.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [abstract and paragraph on A b.c. and Z2 gauge field] The paragraph on A b.c. and Z2 gauge field (and the abstract statement that A b.c. 'amounts to a flux of a Z2 gauge field'): the identification of antiperiodic boundary conditions with Z2 flux insertion for the inversion symmetry n → -n is asserted directly, but the explicit path-integral map or operator equivalence (including any phase contributed by the Θ term under the b.c. change) is not exhibited. This map is load-bearing for the claim that non-invariance of the A b.c. partition function demonstrates an anomaly rather than a mismatch in the identification itself.

    Authors: We agree the explicit path-integral derivation of the map (including the phase from the Θ term) should be shown rather than asserted. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated subsection deriving the equivalence from the definition of the boundary conditions in the path integral, computing the phase factor contributed by the topological term under the change of boundary conditions, and confirming the identification with Z2 flux insertion for the inversion symmetry. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [abstract] The statement that 'summing over the two b.c.s for each direction would amount to gauging': while the topological phase factor (-1)^{Θ/π} is derived, the argument that the resulting sum cannot be made modular invariant (and hence that the gauged RP² model does not exist) requires showing that no additional counterterms or redefinitions of the measure can restore invariance; this step is central to the non-existence conclusion but is stated at the level of the abstract without an explicit modular-transformation calculation.

    Authors: The body derives the phase and states that the sum cannot be made modular invariant when the phase is -1. To address the request for an explicit demonstration that no counterterms restore invariance, we will add a calculation of the modular transformations of the periodic and antiperiodic partition functions (in the main text or an appendix) and explain why the resulting anomaly is topological and cannot be canceled by local counterterms or measure redefinitions. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation uses standard known mapping and direct partition-function calculation.

full rationale

The continuum limit identification Θ=2πS is stated as known from prior literature, not derived here. The A b.c. to Z2 flux correspondence is introduced as the model definition, after which the paper computes the partition function explicitly and shows non-invariance precisely when (-1)^{Θ/π}=-1. This is a direct calculation rather than a reduction to a fitted input or self-citation. The semiclassical spin-chain result recovers previously known crystal momenta without re-deriving the mapping. No load-bearing step reduces by construction to the paper's own inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper rests on the known low-energy mapping of spin chains to the NLSM and on the interpretation of antiperiodic BC as Z2 flux; no free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Low-energy behavior of the SU(2) antiferromagnetic spin chain is given by the O(3) NLSM with Θ=2πS
    Explicitly stated as known in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5962 in / 1317 out tokens · 19510 ms · 2026-06-27T20:55:07.448238+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

57 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    F. Haldane,Continuum dynamics of the 1-D Heisenberg antiferromagnet: Identifi- cation with the O(3) nonlinear sigma model, Physics Letters A93(9), 464 (1983), doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0375-9601(83)90631-X

    work page doi:10.1016/0375-9601(83)90631-x 1983

  2. [2]

    F. D. M. Haldane,Nonlinear field theory of large-spin Heisenberg antiferromagnets: Semiclassically quantized solitons of the one-dimensional easy-axis N´ eel state, Phys. Rev. Lett.50, 1153 (1983), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.50.1153

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.50.1153 1983

  3. [3]

    Affleck and F

    I. Affleck and F. D. M. Haldane,Critical theory of quantum spin chains, Phys. Rev. B36, 5291 (1987), doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.36.5291

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.36.5291 1987

  4. [4]

    E. H. Lieb, T. D. Schultz and D. C. Mattis,Two soluble models of an antiferromag- netic chain, Annals of Physics16(3), 407 (1961), doi:10.1016/0003-4916(61)90115-4

    work page doi:10.1016/0003-4916(61)90115-4 1961

  5. [5]

    Luther and I

    A. Luther and I. Peschel,Calculation of critical exponents in two dimensions from quantum field theory in one dimension, Phys. Rev. B12, 3908 (1975), doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.12.3908

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.12.3908 1975

  6. [6]

    N. D. Mermin,The topological theory of defects in ordered media, Rev. Mod. Phys. 51, 591 (1979), doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.51.591

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.51.591 1979

  7. [7]

    Fateev, E

    V. Fateev, E. Onofri and A. Zamolodchikov,Integrable deformations of the O(3) sigma model. The sausage model, Nuclear Physics B406(3), 521 (1993), doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(93)90001-6

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(93)90001-6 1993

  8. [8]

    L. I. Schiff,Quantum Mechanics, McGraw-Hill, New York, 3rd edn., ISBN 0070856435 (1968)

    1968

  9. [9]

    Sulejmanpasic and Y

    T. Sulejmanpasic and Y. Tanizaki,C-P-T anomaly matching in bosonic quantum field theory and spin chains, Phys. Rev. B97, 144201 (2018), doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.97.144201

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.97.144201 2018

  10. [10]

    Cappelli, C

    A. Cappelli, C. Itzykson and J. B. Zuber,The A-D-E classification of minimal models and A1(1) conformal invariant theories, Communications in Mathematical Physics 113(1), 1 (1987), doi:10.1007/BF01221394

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01221394 1987

  11. [11]

    Gepner and E

    D. Gepner and E. Witten,String theory on group manifolds, Nucl. Phys.B278, 493 (1986)

    1986

  12. [12]

    Witten,Non-abelian bosonization in two dimensions, Communications in Mathe- matical Physics92(4), 455 (1984), doi:10.1007/BF01215276

    E. Witten,Non-abelian bosonization in two dimensions, Communications in Mathe- matical Physics92(4), 455 (1984), doi:10.1007/BF01215276. 102 SciPost Physics Submission

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01215276 1984

  13. [13]

    ’t Hooft, in NATO Sci

    G. ’t Hooft,Naturalness, chiral symmetry, and spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking, In G. ’t Hooft, C. Itzykson, A. Jaffe, H. Lehmann, P. K. Mitter, I. M. Singer and R. Stora, eds.,Recent Developments in Gauge Theories, vol. 59 ofNATO Science Series B, pp. 135–157. Springer, doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-7571-5 9 (1980)

    work page doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-7571-5 1980

  14. [14]

    Cheng and N

    M. Cheng and N. Seiberg,Lieb-Schultz-Mattis, Luttinger, and ’t Hooft - anomaly matching in lattice systems, SciPost Phys.15, 051 (2023), doi:10.21468/SciPostPhys.15.2.051

    work page doi:10.21468/scipostphys.15.2.051 2023

  15. [15]

    Komargodski, A

    Z. Komargodski, A. Sharon, R. Thorngren and X. Zhou,Comments on abelian Higgs models and persistent order, SciPost Phys.6, 003 (2019), doi:10.21468/SciPostPhys.6.1.003

    work page doi:10.21468/scipostphys.6.1.003 2019

  16. [16]

    Gaiotto, A

    D. Gaiotto, A. Kapustin, Z. Komargodski and N. Seiberg,Theta, time re- versal and temperature, Journal of High Energy Physics2017(5), 91 (2017), doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2017)091

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep05(2017)091 2017

  17. [17]

    Seifnashri,Lieb-Schultz-Mattis anomalies as obstructions to gauging (non-on-site) symmetries, SciPost Phys.16, 098 (2024), doi:10.21468/SciPostPhys.16.4.098

    S. Seifnashri,Lieb-Schultz-Mattis anomalies as obstructions to gauging (non-on-site) symmetries, SciPost Phys.16, 098 (2024), doi:10.21468/SciPostPhys.16.4.098

    work page doi:10.21468/scipostphys.16.4.098 2024

  18. [18]

    Affleck and E

    I. Affleck and E. H. Lieb,A proof of part of Haldane’s conjecture on spin chains, Letters in Mathematical Physics12(1), 57 (1986), doi:10.1007/BF00400304

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00400304 1986

  19. [19]

    Witten,Current algebra, baryons, and quark confinement, Nuclear Physics B 223(2), 433 (1983), doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(83)90064-0

    E. Witten,Current algebra, baryons, and quark confinement, Nuclear Physics B 223(2), 433 (1983), doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(83)90064-0

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(83)90064-0 1983

  20. [20]

    L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz,Quantum Mechanics: Non-Relativistic Theory, vol. 3 ofCourse of Theoretical Physics, Pergamon Press, Oxford, 3rd edn., ISBN 9780080291402 (1981)

    1981

  21. [21]

    Br¨ ocker and T

    T. Br¨ ocker and T. tom Dieck,Reprentations of Compact Lie Groups, Springer (1985)

    1985

  22. [22]

    Marshall,Antiferromagnetism, Proceedings of the Royal Society A232, 48 (1955)

    W. Marshall,Antiferromagnetism, Proceedings of the Royal Society A232, 48 (1955)

    1955

  23. [23]

    B. S. Shastry,Exact solution of an s=1/2 Heisenberg antiferromagnetic chain with long-ranged interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett.60, 639 (1988), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.60.639

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.60.639 1988

  24. [24]

    B¨ arwinkel, H.-J

    K. B¨ arwinkel, H.-J. Schmidt and J. Schnack,Ground-state properties of antiferromag- netic Heisenberg spin rings, Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials220(2), 227 (2000), doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-8853(00)00481-9

    work page doi:10.1016/s0304-8853(00)00481-9 2000

  25. [25]

    Affleck, T

    I. Affleck, T. Kennedy, E. H. Lieb and H. Tasaki,Valence bond ground states in isotropic quantum antiferromagnets, Communications in Mathematical Physics 115(3), 477 (1988)

    1988

  26. [26]

    P. W. Anderson,An approximate quantum theory of the antiferromagnetic ground state, Phys. Rev.86, 694 (1952), doi:10.1103/PhysRev.86.694

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.86.694 1952

  27. [27]

    P. Roux, J. L. Jacobsen, S. Ribault and H. Saleur,Critical spin chains and loop models withP SU(n)symmetry, SciPost Phys.18, 033 (2025), doi:10.21468/SciPostPhys.18.1.033

    work page doi:10.21468/scipostphys.18.1.033 2025

  28. [28]

    A. B. Zamolodchikov and A. B. Zamolodchikov,Factorized S-matrices in two dimen- sions as the exact solutions of certain relativistic quantum field theory models, Annals of Physics120(2), 253 (1979), doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-4916(79)90391-9. 103 SciPost Physics Submission

    work page doi:10.1016/0003-4916(79)90391-9 1979

  29. [29]

    Wiegmann,Exact solution of the O(3) nonlinear sigma-model, Physics Letters B 152(3), 209 (1985), doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(85)91171-2

    P. Wiegmann,Exact solution of the O(3) nonlinear sigma-model, Physics Letters B 152(3), 209 (1985), doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(85)91171-2

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(85)91171-2 1985

  30. [30]

    Hasenbusch, O(N)andRP N−1 models in two dimensions, Phys

    M. Hasenbusch, O(N)andRP N−1 models in two dimensions, Phys. Rev. D53, 3445 (1996), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.53.3445

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.53.3445 1996

  31. [31]

    Maier and A

    W. Maier and A. Saupe,Eine einfache molekular-statistische theorie der nematischen kristallinfl¨ ussigen phase. teil 1, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Naturforschung A14, 882 (1959)

    1959

  32. [32]

    Maier and A

    W. Maier and A. Saupe,Eine einfache molekular-statistische theorie der nematischen kristallinfl¨ ussigen phase. teil 2, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Naturforschung A15, 287 (1960)

    1960

  33. [33]

    P. A. Lebwohl and G. Lasher,Nematic-liquid-crystal order—a Monte Carlo calcula- tion, Phys. Rev. A6, 426 (1972), doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.6.426

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.6.426 1972

  34. [34]

    S. M. Catterall, M. Hasenbusch, R. R. Horgan and R. Renken,Nature of the continuum limit in the 2dRP 2 gauge model, Phys. Rev. D58, 074510 (1998), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.58.074510

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.58.074510 1998

  35. [35]

    Ueda and M

    A. Ueda and M. Oshikawa,Tensor network renormalization study on the crossover in classical Heisenberg andRP 2 models in two dimensions, Phys. Rev. E106, 014104 (2022), doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.106.014104

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.106.014104 2022

  36. [36]

    Burgelman, L

    L. Burgelman, L. Devos, B. Vanhecke, F. Verstraete and L. Vanderstraeten,Con- trasting pseudocriticality in the classical two-dimensional Heisenberg andRP 2 models: Zero-temperature phase transition versus finite-temperature crossover, Phys. Rev. E 107, 014117 (2023), doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.107.014117

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.107.014117 2023

  37. [37]

    S. C. Furuya and M. Oshikawa,Symmetry protection of critical phases and a global anomaly in1 + 1dimensions, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 021601 (2017), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.021601

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.118.021601 2017

  38. [38]

    Ogata and H

    Y. Ogata and H. Tasaki,Lieb–Schultz–Mattis type theorems for quantum spin chains without continuous symmetry, Communications in Mathematical Physics372(3), 951 (2019), doi:10.1007/s00220-019-03343-5

    work page doi:10.1007/s00220-019-03343-5 2019

  39. [39]

    Affleck,The quantum Hall effects,σmodels atΘ =πand quantum spin chains, Nuclear Physics B257, 397 (1985), doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(85)90353- 0

    I. Affleck,The quantum Hall effects,σmodels atΘ =πand quantum spin chains, Nuclear Physics B257, 397 (1985), doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(85)90353- 0

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(85)90353- 1985

  40. [40]

    Hason, Z

    I. Hason, Z. Komargodski and R. Thorngren,Anomaly matching in the symmetry broken phase: Domain walls, CPT, and the Smith isomorphism, SciPost Phys.8, 062 (2020), doi:10.21468/SciPostPhys.8.4.062

    work page doi:10.21468/scipostphys.8.4.062 2020

  41. [41]

    D. S. Dummit and R. M. Foote,Abstract Algebra, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, 3rd edn., ISBN 978-0471433347 (2004)

    2004

  42. [42]

    Fulton and J

    W. Fulton and J. Harris,Representation Theory: A First Course, vol. 129 ofGraduate Texts in Mathematics, Springer, ISBN 9780387974958, doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-0979- 9 (1991)

    work page doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-0979- 1991

  43. [43]

    Gaudin,The Bethe Wavefunction, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, ISBN 9781107045852, Translated from the original French editionLa Fonction d’Onde de Bethe(1995) (2014)

    M. Gaudin,The Bethe Wavefunction, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, ISBN 9781107045852, Translated from the original French editionLa Fonction d’Onde de Bethe(1995) (2014). 104 SciPost Physics Submission

    1995

  44. [44]

    Klumper, M

    A. Klumper, M. T. Batchelor and P. A. Pearce,Central charges of the 6- and 19- vertex models with twisted boundary conditions, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General24(13), 3111 (1991), doi:10.1088/0305-4470/24/13/025

    work page doi:10.1088/0305-4470/24/13/025 1991

  45. [45]

    de Vega and M

    H. de Vega and M. Karowski,Conformal invariance and integrable theories, Nuclear Physics B285, 619 (1987), doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(87)90358-0

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(87)90358-0 1987

  46. [46]

    F. C. Alcaraz, M. N. Barber and M. T. Batchelor,Conformal invariance, the XXZ chain and the operator content of two-dimensional critical systems, Annals of Physics 182(2), 280 (1988), doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-4916(88)90015-2

    work page doi:10.1016/0003-4916(88)90015-2 1988

  47. [47]

    Di Francesco, H

    P. Di Francesco, H. Saleur and J.-B. Zuber,Relations between the coulomb gas picture and conformal invariance of two-dimensional critical models, Journal of statistical physics49(1-2), 57 (1987), doi:10.1007/BF01009954

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01009954 1987

  48. [48]

    Koo and H

    W. Koo and H. Saleur,Representations of the virasoro algebra from lattice models, Nu- clear Physics B426(3), 459 (1994), doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(94)90018- 3

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(94)90018- 1994

  49. [49]

    R. J. Baxter,Exactly Solved Models in Statistical Mechanics, Academic Press, Lon- don, ISBN 978-0-12-083180-7 (1982)

    1982

  50. [50]

    Hatcher,Algebraic Topology, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 9780521795401 (2002)

    A. Hatcher,Algebraic Topology, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 9780521795401 (2002)

    2002

  51. [51]

    Affleck, D

    I. Affleck, D. Bykov and K. Wamer,Flag manifold sigma models: Spin chains and integrable theories, Physics Reports953, 1 (2022), doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2021.09.004, Flag manifold sigma models: Spin chains and integrable theories

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2021.09.004 2022

  52. [52]

    Read and S

    N. Read and S. Sachdev,Large-N expansion for frustrated quantum antiferromagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.66, 1773 (1991), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.66.1773

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.66.1773 1991

  53. [53]

    Sachdev and N

    S. Sachdev and N. Read,Large-N expansion for frustrated and doped quantum an- tiferromagnets, International Journal of Modern Physics B05(01n02), 219 (1991), doi:10.1142/S0217979291000158,https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217979291000158

    work page doi:10.1142/s0217979291000158 1991

  54. [54]

    Bourbaki,Lie Groups and Lie Algebras: Chapters 7–9, Elements of Mathematics

    N. Bourbaki,Lie Groups and Lie Algebras: Chapters 7–9, Elements of Mathematics. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin / Heidelberg, 1st edition, 2nd printing 2008 edn., ISBN 978-3-540-68851-8 (2005)

    2008

  55. [55]

    J. F. Adams,Lectures on Exceptional Lie Groups, Chicago Lectures in Mathematics. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, ISBN 9780226005270 (1996)

    1996

  56. [56]

    Milnor,Morse Theory, vol

    J. Milnor,Morse Theory, vol. 51 ofAnnals of Mathematics Studies, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (1963)

    1963

  57. [57]

    G. D. James and A. Kerber,The Representation Theory of the Symmetric Group, vol. 16 ofEncyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, Addison-Wesley Pub- lishing Co., Reading, MA, ISBN 0-201-13515-9 (1981). 105

    1981