Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 56 references

Relative Invertibility and Full Dualizability of Finite Braided Tensor Categories

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper proves that every finite braided tensor category with separable symmetric center is fully dualizable in the Morita 4-category of braided pre-tensor categories, hence yields a fully extended framed 4-dimensional topological field…

desk verdict Strong paper: the main theorem is genuinely new and the proofs are careful, but everything rests on a Tannaka reconstruction imported from [LM24], so the referee should pressure-test Section 2.3. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.16241 v1 pith:7TKDPQ35 submitted 2025-06-19 math.QA math.CT

Thibault D. Décoppet This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.QAmath.CT MSC 18M1516T0557R56
keywords braidedtensorcategoriesrelativeuniversalHopfalgebrasymmetriccenterMorita4-categoryfulldualizabilitycobordismhypothesisWittgroupcanonicalpairing
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper aims to prove that a large class of finite braided tensor categories—those whose symmetric center is separable—are fully dualizable objects in the Morita 4-category of braided pre-tensor categories. Full dualizability is exactly what the cobordism hypothesis requires for such a category to define a fully extended, framed 4-dimensional topological field theory. The route goes through a relative version of the classical non-degeneracy theory: fixing a finite symmetric tensor category $E$, the paper constructs a relative universal Hopf algebra $F_{E/A}$ inside a finite braided tensor category $A$, shows its canonical pairing descends from the absolute one, and proves the pairing is non-degenerate precisely when $A$ is $E$-non-degenerate. It then shows $E$-non-degeneracy is equivalent to invertibility in the $E$-enriched Morita 4-category, which yields the dualizability theorem by taking $E$ to be the category's own symmetric center.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the relative universal Hopf algebra $F_{E/A}$, a Hopf algebra inside $A$ characterized by an equivalence of tensor categories $\mathrm{Comod}_A(F_{E/A}) \simeq A \boxtimes_E A^{mop}$; it generalizes the absolute universal Hopf algebra, which is recovered when $E = \mathrm{Vec}$. The paper shows the absolute universal Hopf algebra $F_A$ fits into an exact sequence $F_E \hookrightarrow F_A \twoheadrightarrow F_{E/A}$, and that the canonical pairing on $F_A$ descends to a pairing $\omega_{E/A}$ on $F_{E/A}$. Non-degeneracy of this pairing is the pivot: it is shown equivalent to relative factorizability, relative cofactorizability, and $E$-non-degeneracy, and through the Morita category it becomes equivalent to invertibility. Throughout, the comparison runs through the (co)module categories of $F_{E/A}$, with the relative Deligne tensor product and the relative Drinfeld center as the categorical side of the correspondence.

What would settle it

Compute the relative canonical pairing $\omega_{E/A}$ for a finite braided tensor category whose symmetric center is $\mathrm{sVec}$—for example one of the slightly degenerate quantum-group categories described in the paper—and check whether the functor $A \boxtimes_E A^{mop} \to Z(A,E)$ is an equivalence. The theorem predicts both the non-degeneracy of the pairing and the equivalence; finding a nonzero kernel or a functor that fails to be an equivalence for any such category would refute the main claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Over an algebraically closed field, the paper's central claim is a chain of equivalences. For a finite braided tensor category $A$ enriched over a finite symmetric tensor category $E$, the following are equivalent: the enrichment functor $E \to Z^{(2)}(A)$ is an equivalence; $A$ is $E$-factorizable, meaning $A \boxtimes_E A^{rev}$ is equivalent to the relative Drinfeld center $Z(A,E)$; $A$ is $E$-cofactorizable, meaning the relative Harish-Chandra category is equivalent to the endomorphism category of $E$-enriched functors; and the relative canonical pairing $\omega_{E/A}$ on $F_{E/A}$ is non-degenerate. Because the paper proves that $E$-non-degeneracy is precisely invertibility in the Morita 4-category of $E$-enriched braided pre-tensor categories, these algebraic criteria become a higher-categorical invertibility criterion. Applying the criterion with $E$ equal to the symmetric center of $A$ gives the main theorem: if that center is separable, $A$ is fully dualizable in the Morita 4-category of braided pre-tensor categories. In characteristic zero, the paper also establishes the converse: a fully dualizable finite braided tensor category must have finite semisimple, hence separable, symmetric center.

Load-bearing premise

The argument depends on the imported Tannaka reconstruction theorem asserting that every faithfully flat $E$-enriched finite braided tensor category $A$ (faithfully flat meaning the inclusion of $E$ into the symmetric center is fully faithful) has a relative universal Hopf algebra $F_{E/A}$ in $A$ whose comodule category is $A \boxtimes_E A^{mop}$; the paper's proof of this fact is only a sketch. If that reconstruction failed for even one relevant category, the relative pairing, the invertibility criterion, and the full dualizability theorem would lose their main tool.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every finite braided tensor category whose symmetric center is separable becomes a fully dualizable object of the Morita 4-category of braided pre-tensor categories; the previously known separable case is a special case of this result.
  • By the cobordism hypothesis, each such category determines a fully extended framed 4-dimensional topological field theory valued in the Morita 4-category.
  • In characteristic zero, the characterization is sharp: a finite braided tensor category is fully dualizable exactly when its symmetric center is finite semisimple.
  • Slightly degenerate categories—those whose symmetric center is just super vector spaces—now count as fully dualizable, a case not covered by the earlier separable and non-degenerate theorems.
  • The Picard group of the separable $E$-enriched Morita 4-category is identified with the relative Witt group of $E$-non-degenerate separable braided tensor categories, giving a higher-categorical construction of those Witt groups.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial extension: if the expected converse over perfect fields holds, full dualizability in the Morita 4-category of braided pre-tensor categories would be classified exactly by separability of the symmetric center, making the main theorem a complete classification rather than a sufficient condition.
  • Editorial extension: the exact sequence $F_E \hookrightarrow F_A \twoheadrightarrow F_{E/A}$ suggests a relative Tannaka-Krein picture in which the symmetric center is systematically quotiented out; this could make slightly degenerate categories a natural test bed for non-semisimple 4-manifold invariants, since fully extended semisimple theories are expected not to detect exotic smooth structures.
  • Editorial extension: the non-degeneracy criterion gives a practical algebraic recipe in positive characteristic: to test whether a finite braided tensor category is invertible relative to its symmetric center, one can compute the kernel of $\omega_{E/A}$ instead of analyzing Drinfeld centers directly.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops a relative (E-enriched) version of Shimizu's characterizations of non-degeneracy for finite braided tensor categories. For a finite symmetric tensor category E and an E-enriched finite braided tensor category A that is faithfully flat, the author constructs a relative universal Hopf algebra F_{E/A} in A, establishes an exact sequence F_E → F_A → F_{E/A}, and shows that the canonical pairing on F_A descends to a pairing on F_{E/A}. The main results are: (Theorem B) equivalence of E-non-degeneracy, E-factorizability, E-cofactorizability, and non-degeneracy of the relative pairing; (Theorem 3.5.1 / Corollary C) an E-enriched finite braided tensor category is invertible in Mor^pre_2(Pr_E) iff it is E-non-degenerate; and (Theorem D) a finite braided tensor category with separable symmetric center is fully dualizable in Mor^pre_2(Pr). Applications include descriptions of relative Witt groups and a partial converse in characteristic zero.

Significance. If the results are correct, Theorem D is a substantial common generalization of the full dualizability results of Brochier–Jordan–Snyder and Brochier–Jordan–Safronov–Snyder, and Corollary C provides a useful relative invertibility criterion in higher Morita categories. The paper also gives a new description of the kernel of the canonical pairing (Corollary 3.3.3) and answers a question from [BJSS21] about Drinfeld centers in the finite Witt group (Proposition 4.2.1). The proofs are structurally explicit, with the Frobenius–Perron dimension argument in Theorem 3.2.1 being particularly clean, and the paper is honest about its limitations, including the incomplete reduction to perfect fields in Remark 3.2.2 and the conjectural converse in Conjecture 4.3.6. No internal circularity is apparent. The main caveat is that several load-bearing tools are imported from recent preprints, especially the relative Tannaka reconstruction in Proposition 2.3.1.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 2.3, Proposition 2.3.1] The existence of the relative universal Hopf algebra F_{E/A} and, crucially, the tensor-category equivalence Comod_A(F_{E/A}) ≃ A ⊠_E A^mop are the foundation for Theorem A, Proposition 2.5.1, all of Section 3, and Theorem 4.3.1. The proof given in the text constructs the multiplication but delegates the antipode and the verification that the functor T_{E/A} satisfies the hypotheses of [LM24, Theorems 6.11 and 6.17] to the cited reference. Please either state the cited theorems in full and check their hypotheses explicitly for T_{E/A} (exactness, faithfulness, compatibility with left A-module structures, and representability of the relevant comonad by a Hopf algebra in A), or include a complete proof. As written, the main theorems are conditional on an unverified application of an external reconstruction theorem.
  2. [Section 4.3, proof of Theorem 4.3.1] The step transferring invertibility from Mor_2(Pr_E) to Mor_2(Pr) uses [Kin24, Lemma 2.22] (which builds on [Hau23]) to obtain a forgetful functor, but the lemma is not stated and its hypotheses are not checked in the manuscript. This transfer is load-bearing: it is what makes the 1-morphism A : A ⊠_E A^rev ↛ E invertible in Mor_2(Pr), and hence what supplies the adjoints needed for full dualizability. Please state the lemma and verify that it applies to the specific 1-morphism being factored. The same request applies to the use of [Kin24, Proposition 3.13] in Lemma 2.1.4, which supplies the explicit description of T_{E/A} used later.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 1.6] There is a typo: 'locally finite presnetable' should be 'locally finitely presentable'.
  2. [Definition 1.6.2] There is a typo: 'full dualizbale' should be 'fully dualizable'.
  3. [Lemma 2.1.4 and Theorem 2.4.3] The notation F_E is used for two different objects: a commutative algebra T_E T_E^R(1) in E in Lemma 2.1.4, and a Hopf algebra in A in Theorem 2.4.3. This is confusing and should be disambiguated, for example by writing F_E^E or F_{E,alg} for the former.
  4. [Remark 2.2.2] In the example E = Vec_R and A = Vec_C, it would be helpful to spell out why the induced map on monoidal units, namely C ⊗_R C → C, is not faithful; this is the point of the remark but the reader has to supply the computation.
  5. [References] The reference [Bru00] contains typographical errors ('Mathematishe Annalen' and the year '200'); please proofread the bibliography. Also, [DSPS21] lists 'Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. AMS' without a volume number.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the central argument reduces to external reconstruction and characterization results, not to the paper's own conclusions; deferred proofs are completeness limitations, not self-referential steps.

full rationale

The central derivation chain is not circular. The relative Hopf algebra F_{E/A} is imported from the Tannaka reconstruction theorem of [LM24, Theorems 6.11 and 6.17] (Prop. 2.3.1), an external source, and the main equivalences (Thm. 3.2.1, Props. 3.3.2 and 3.4.2, Thm. 3.5.1, Cor. C) are proven from the Barr-Beck theorem, Frobenius-Perron dimension arguments, and the external characterizations of [Shi19], [BJS21], [BJSS21], and [SY24]. Corollary 3.3.3 is a genuine consequence: with E = Z(2)(A), E-non-degeneracy is tautologically true, so Theorem 3.2.1 and Proposition 3.3.2 yield non-degeneracy of the descended pairing, and the kernel equality follows. The weakest point is Prop. 2.3.1, where the Hopf algebra/antipode structure is only sketched and deferred to [LM24, Section 6.5]; this is a load-bearing external dependency and a completeness limitation, but not a circular reduction, because [LM24] is not the present paper's own result and does not assume the target theorem. Similarly, Remark 3.2.2 explicitly leaves the arbitrary-perfect-field base change incomplete, and Proposition 4.1.1 relies on [DHJF+24, Theorem 2.51], which includes the author among its contributors; these concern applications and remarks, not the load-bearing part of the full dualizability theorem, and they cite independent prior work rather than the conclusion being proved. No equation or fitted parameter is reused as its own prediction, and no self-citation is invoked to forbid alternatives.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 10 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no fitted constants and no postulated entities. The relative universal Hopf algebra F_{E/A} is constructed from existing categorical data via Tannaka reconstruction. The main inputs are external theorems from [Shi19], [BJS21], [BJSS21], [LM24], [SY24], [DSPS21], and [CSZ25].

assumptions (10)
  • standard math The special adjoint functor theorem provides right adjoints to cocontinuous functors between locally finitely presentable categories.
    Used throughout Section 1.1 and in adjointness arguments.
  • domain assumption K is a perfect field, and main theorems additionally assume the field is algebraically closed.
    Standing assumption from the Introduction; Theorem 3.2.1 and Theorem 3.5.1 explicitly impose algebraic closure.
  • domain assumption Finite tensor categories are ind-completions of the finite multitensor categories of [EGNO15].
    Definitional convention in Section 1.2 that governs all finiteness and dimension computations.
  • domain assumption The relative Deligne-Kelly tensor product exists and has the universal and finiteness properties stated in [DSPS19] and [BZBJ18a].
    Used to form A ⊠_E A^mop and to prove Proposition 2.1.3.
  • domain assumption Tannaka reconstruction as in [LM24, Theorems 6.11 and 6.17] supplies a Hopf algebra F_{E/A} in A with Comod_A(F_{E/A}) equivalent to A ⊠_E A^mop.
    Proposition 2.3.1 invokes this external reconstruction; the paper only sketches a proof.
  • standard math Frobenius-Perron dimensions satisfy the identities of [EGNO15, Chapters 3 and 6], including FPdim(A ⊠_E A^rev) = FPdim(A)^2 / FPdim(E) for fully faithful E ⊆ A.
    Central numerical identity in the proof of Theorem 3.2.1.
  • domain assumption The general invertibility criterion for objects of Mor^pre_2(Pr_E) from [BJSS21, Theorem 2.30] is valid.
    Theorem 3.1.2 is a specialization of this external criterion, not reproved.
  • domain assumption The 3-dualizability and adjointness statements for Mor^pre_2(Pr_E) from [BJS21, Theorem 5.16] and [GS18] hold in the enriched setting.
    Proposition 1.6.1 and Theorem 4.3.1 rely on these assertions.
  • domain assumption Separability of a finite symmetric tensor category E is equivalent to separability of the algebra T^R_E(1) in E ⊠ E, as in [DSPS21, Corollary 2.5.9].
    Used in the adjointness arguments at the end of Theorem 4.3.1.
  • domain assumption The equivalence HC(E) ≃ Mod_E(F_E) ≃ Z(E) used in Proposition 4.3.7 is valid.
    Imported from [Shi17] and [BJS21] for the converse dualizability statement in the symmetric case.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Relative Invertibility and Full Dualizability of Finite Braided Tensor Categories." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7TKDPQ35

@misc{pith2026250616241,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Relative Invertibility and Full Dualizability of Finite Braided Tensor Categories},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7TKDPQ35}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.16241}
}
abstract

Fix a finite symmetric tensor category $\mathcal{E}$ over an algebraically closed field. We derive an $\mathcal{E}$-enriched version of Shimizu's characterizations of non-degeneracy for finite braided tensor categories. In order to do so, we consider, associated to any $\mathcal{E}$-enriched finite braided tensor category $\mathcal{A}$ satisfying a mild technical assumption, a Hopf algebra $\mathbb{F}_{\mathcal{E}/\mathcal{A}}$ in $\mathcal{A}$. This is a generalization of Lyubashenko's universal Hopf algebra $\mathbb{F}_{\mathcal{A}}$ in $\mathcal{A}$. In fact, we show that there is a short exact sequence $\mathbb{F}_{\mathcal{E}}\rightarrow\mathbb{F}_{\mathcal{A}}\rightarrow\mathbb{F}_{\mathcal{E}/\mathcal{A}}$ of Hopf algebras in $\mathcal{A}$, and that the canonical pairing on $\mathbb{F}_{\mathcal{A}}$ descends to a pairing $\omega_{\mathcal{E}/\mathcal{A}}$ on $\mathbb{F}_{\mathcal{E}/\mathcal{A}}$. We prove that $\mathcal{A}$ is $\mathcal{E}$-non-degenerate, i.e.\ its symmetric center is exactly $\mathcal{E}$, if and only if the pairing $\omega_{\mathcal{E}/\mathcal{A}}$ is non-degenerate. We then use the above characterization to show that an $\mathcal{E}$-enriched finite braided tensor category is invertible in the Morita 4-category of $\mathcal{E}$-enriched pre-tensor categories if and only if it is $\mathcal{E}$-non-degenerate. As an application of our relative invertibility criterion, we extend the full dualizability result of Brochier-Jordan-Snyder by showing that a finite braided tensor category is fully dualizable as an object of the Morita 4-category of braided pre-tensor categories if its symmetric center is separable.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Reflexivity and dualizability in categorified linear algebra

    Martin Brandenburg, Alexandru Chirvasitu, and Theo Johnson-Freyd. Reflexivity and dualizability in categorified linear algebra. Theory Appl. Cat. , 30(23):808--835, 2015. arXiv:1409.5934

    work page Pith review arXiv 2015

  2. [2]

    Higher‐dimensional algebra and topological quantum field theory

    John Baez and James Dolan. Higher‐dimensional algebra and topological quantum field theory. J. Math. Phys. , 36(11):6073–6105, 1995. arXiv:q-alg/9503002

    arXiv 1995

  3. [3]

    Kerler-Lyubashenko Functors on 4-Dimensional 2-Handlebodies

    Anna Beliakova and Marco De Renzi. K erler- L yubashenko functors on 4-dimensional 2-handlebodies. Int. Math. Res. Not. , 2024(13):10005–10080, 2024. arXiv:2105.02789

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  4. [4]

    Douglas, Christopher J

    Bruce Bartlett, Christopher L. Douglas, Christopher J. Schommer-Pries, and Jamie Vicary. Modular categories as representations of the 3-dimensional bordism 2-category, 2015. arXiv:1509.06811

    arXiv 2015

  5. [5]

    New incompressible symmetric tensor categories in positive characteristic

    Dave Benson, Pavel Etingof, and Victor Ostrik. New incompressible symmetric tensor categories in positive characteristic. Duke Math. J. , 172(1):105--200, 2023. arXiv:2003.10499

    arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    On dualizability of braided tensor categories

    Adrien Brochier, David Jordan, and Noah Snyder. On dualizability of braided tensor categories. Compositio Math. , 3:435--483, 2021. arXiv:1804.07538

    arXiv 2021

  7. [7]

    Invertible braided tensor categories

    Adrien Brochier, David Jordan, Pavel Safronov, and Noah Snyder. Invertible braided tensor categories. Algebr. Geom. Topol. , 12:2107--2140, 2021. arXiv:2003.13812

    arXiv 2021

  8. [8]

    Exact sequences of tensor categories

    Alain Brugui \`e res and Sonia Natale. Exact sequences of tensor categories. Int. Math. Res. Not. , 2011(24):5644–5705, 2011. arXiv:1006.0569

    work page Pith review arXiv 2011

Show all 56 references
  1. [9]

    Cat \'e gories pr \'e modulaires, modularisations et invariants des vari \'e t \'e s de dimension 3

    Alain Brugui \`e res. Cat \'e gories pr \'e modulaires, modularisations et invariants des vari \'e t \'e s de dimension 3. Mathematishe Annalen , 316:215–236, 200

  2. [10]

    Hopf monads

    Alain Brugui \`e res and Alexis Virelizier. Hopf monads. Advances in Mathematics , 215(2):679–733, 2007. arXiv:math/0604180

    2007 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Integrating quantum groups over surfaces

    David Ben-Zvi, Adrien Brochier, and David Jordan. Integrating quantum groups over surfaces. J. Topol. , 11(4):874--917, 2018. arXiv:1501.04652

    2018 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Quantum character varieties and braided module categories

    David Ben-Zvi, Adrien Brochier, and David Jordan. Quantum character varieties and braided module categories. Selecta Mathematica , 24(5):4711–4748, 2018. arXiv:1606.04769

    2018 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Skein (3+1)- TQFTs from non-semisimple ribbon categories, 2023

    Francesco Costantino, Nathan Geer, Benjamin Ha\" i oun, and Bertrand Patureau-Mirand . Skein (3+1)- TQFTs from non-semisimple ribbon categories, 2023. arXiv:2306.03225

    2023 arXiv

  6. [14]

    State-sum invariants of 4-manifolds I

    Louis Crane, Louis Kauffman, and David Yetter. State-sum invariants of 4-manifolds I . J. Knot Theory Ramif. , 6(2):177--234, 1997. arXiv:hep-th/9409167

    1997 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Monoidal abelian envelopes

    Kevin Coulembier. Monoidal abelian envelopes. Compositio Math. , 157(7):1584--1609, 2021. arXiv:2003.10105

    2021 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Simple algebras and exact module categories, 2025

    Kevin Coulembier, Mateusz Stroi \'n ski, and Tony Zorman. Simple algebras and exact module categories, 2025. arXiv:2501.06629

    2025 arXiv

  9. [17]

    D \'e coppet

    Thibault D. D \'e coppet. Higher V erlinde categories: The mixed case, 2024. arXiv:2407.20211

    2024 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Cat \'e gories T annakienne

    Pierre Deligne. Cat \'e gories T annakienne. In The Grothendieck Festschrift, Vol. II , volume 87 of Prog. Math. , pages 111--195. Birkh \"a user Boston, 1990

    1990

  11. [19]

    Cat \'e gories tensorielles

    Pierre Deligne. Cat \'e gories tensorielles. Mosc. Math. J. , 2(2):227--248, 2002

    2002

  12. [20]

    D \'e coppet, Peter Houston, Theo Johnson-Freyd, Dmitri Nikshych, Dave Penneys, Julia Plavnik, David Reutter, and Matthew Yu

    Thibault D. D \'e coppet, Peter Houston, Theo Johnson-Freyd, Dmitri Nikshych, Dave Penneys, Julia Plavnik, David Reutter, and Matthew Yu. The classification of fusion 2-categories, 2024. arXiv:2411.05907

    2024 arXiv

  13. [21]

    The W itt group of non-degenerate braided fusion categories

    Alexei Davydov, Michael M \"u ger, Dmitri Nikshych, and Victor Ostrik. The W itt group of non-degenerate braided fusion categories. J. Reine Angew. Math. , 2013(667), 2013. arXiv:1009.2117

    2013 arXiv

  14. [22]

    On the structure of the W itt group of braided fusion categories

    Alexei Davydov, Dmitri Nikshych, and Victor Ostrik. On the structure of the W itt group of braided fusion categories. Selecta Mathematica , 19:237–269, 2013. arXiv:1109.5558

    2013 arXiv

  15. [23]

    D \'e coppet and Sean Sanford

    Thibault D. D \'e coppet and Sean Sanford. Compact semisimple tensor 2-categories are M orita connected. Int. Math. Res. Not. , 2025(11):rnaf13, 2025. arXiv:2412.15019

    2025 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Douglas, Christopher Schommer-Pries, and Noah Snyder

    Christopher L. Douglas, Christopher Schommer-Pries, and Noah Snyder. The balanced tensor product of module categories. Kyoto J. Math. , 59:167--179, 2019. arXiv:1406.4204

    2019 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Douglas, Christopher Schommer-Pries, and Noah Snyder

    Christopher L. Douglas, Christopher Schommer-Pries, and Noah Snyder. Dualizable tensor categories . Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. AMS, 2021. arXiv:1312.7188

    2021 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Descent and forms of tensor categories

    Pavel Etingof and Shlomo Gelaki. Descent and forms of tensor categories. Int. Math. Res. Not. , 2012(13):3040–3063, 2012. arXiv:1102.065

    2012

  19. [27]

    Tensor Categories

    Pavel Etingof, Shlomo Gelaki, Dmitri Nikshych, and Victor Ostrik. Tensor Categories . Mathematical Surveys and Monographs. AMS, 2015

    2015

  20. [28]

    An analogue of R adford’s S^4 formula for finite tensor categories

    Pavel Etingof, Dmitri Nikshych, and Victor Ostrik. An analogue of R adford’s S^4 formula for finite tensor categories. Int. Math. Res. Not. , 54:2915–2933, 2004. arXiv:math.QA/0404504

    2004

  21. [29]

    On fusion categories

    Pavel Etingof, Dmitri Nikshych, and Victor Ostrik. On fusion categories. Annals of Mathematics , 162:581--642, 2005. arXiv: math/0203060

    2005 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Tensor products of finitely cocomplete and abelian categories

    Ignacio Lopez Franco. Tensor products of finitely cocomplete and abelian categories. J. Algebra , 396:207--219, 2013. arXiv:1212.1545

    2013 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Duals and adjoints in higher M orita categories, 2018

    Owen Gwilliam and Claudia Scheimbauer. Duals and adjoints in higher M orita categories, 2018. arXiv:1804.10924

    2018 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Unit inclusion in a non-semisimple braided tensor category and non-compact relative TQFTs , 2023

    Benjamin Ha \" oun. Unit inclusion in a non-semisimple braided tensor category and non-compact relative TQFTs , 2023. arXiv:2304.12167, To appear in Geometry & Topology

    2023 arXiv

  25. [33]

    The higher M orita category of E_n –algebras

    Rune Haugseng. The higher M orita category of E_n –algebras. Geometry & Topology , 21(1):1631–1730, 2017. arXiv:1412.8459

    2017 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Some remarks on higher M orita categories, 2023

    Rune Haugseng. Some remarks on higher M orita categories, 2023. arXiv:2309.09761

    2023 arXiv

  27. [35]

    ( O p)lax natural transformations, twisted quantum field theories, and `` even higher " M orita categories

    Theo Johnson-Freyd and Claudia Scheimbauer. ( O p)lax natural transformations, twisted quantum field theories, and `` even higher " M orita categories. Advances in Mathematics , 307(2):147–223, 2017. arXiv:1502.06526v3

    2017 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Non-semisimple C rane- Y etter theory varying over the character stack, 2024

    Patrick Kinnear. Non-semisimple C rane- Y etter theory varying over the character stack, 2024. arXiv:2404.19667

    2024

  29. [37]

    Lyubashenko

    Thomas Kerler and Volodymyr V. Lyubashenko. Non-Semisimple Topological Quantum Field Theories for 3-Manifolds with Corners . Lecture Notes in Mathematics. Springer, 2003

    2003

  30. [38]

    The relative monoidal center and tensor products of monoidal categories

    Robert Laugwitz. The relative monoidal center and tensor products of monoidal categories. Commun. Contemp. Math. , 22(8), 2020. arXiv:1803.04403

    2020 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Fibre functors and reconstruction of H opf algebras

    Simon Lentner and Mart \'i n Mombelli. Fibre functors and reconstruction of H opf algebras. Canadian J. Math. , 2024:1--44, 2024. arXiv:2311.14221

    2024 arXiv

  32. [40]

    On the classification of topological field theories

    Jacob Lurie. On the classification of topological field theories. Curr. Dev. Math. , 1:129--280, 2010

    2010

  33. [41]

    Lyubashenko

    Volodymyr V. Lyubashenko. Invariants of 3-manifolds and projective representations of mapping class groups via quantum groups at roots of unity. Commun. Math. Phys. , 172:467--516, 1995. arXiv:hep-th/9405167

    1995 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Lyubashenko

    Volodymyr V. Lyubashenko. Modular properties of ribbon abelian categories. In Proceedings of the 2nd Gauss symposium. Conference A:\ Mathematics and Theoretical Physics , pages 529--579. De Gruyter, 1995. arXiv:hep-th/9405168

    1995 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Lyubashenko

    Volodymyr V. Lyubashenko. Modular transformations for tensor categories. J. Pure Appl. Algebra , 98:279--327, 1995

    1995

  36. [44]

    Lyubashenko

    Volodymyr V. Lyubashenko. Squared H opf algebras . Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. AMS, 1999

    1999

  37. [45]

    Braided groups

    Shahn Majid. Braided groups. J. Pure Appl. Algebra , 86:187--221, 1993

    1993

  38. [46]

    Completion for braided enriched monoidal categories, 2018

    Scott Morrison, David Penneys, and Julia Plavnik. Completion for braided enriched monoidal categories, 2018. arXiv:1809.09782

    2018 arXiv

  39. [47]

    On the structure of modular categories

    Michael M \"u ger. On the structure of modular categories. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. , 87:291--308, 2003. arXiv:math/0201017

    2003 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Quantum F robenius and modularity for quantum groups at arbitrary roots of 1, 2023

    Cris Negron. Quantum F robenius and modularity for quantum groups at arbitrary roots of 1, 2023. arXiv:2311.13797

    2023 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Semisimple four-dimensional topological field theories cannot detect exotic smooth structure

    David Reutter. Semisimple four-dimensional topological field theories cannot detect exotic smooth structure. J. Topol. , 16(2):542--566, 2023. arXiv:2001.02288

    2023

  42. [50]

    Some remarks on exact sequences of quantum groups

    Hans-J \"u rgen Schneider. Some remarks on exact sequences of quantum groups. Commun. Algebra , 21:3337--3357, 1993

    1993

  43. [51]

    On unimodular finite tensor categories

    Kenichi Shimizu. On unimodular finite tensor categories. Int. Math. Res. Not. , 2017(1):277–322, 2017. arXiv:1402.3482

    2017 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Non-degeneracy conditions for braided finite tensor categories

    Kenichi Shimizu. Non-degeneracy conditions for braided finite tensor categories. Advances in Mathematics , 355:106778, 2019. arXiv:1602.06534

    2019 arXiv

  45. [53]

    SL_2 tilting modules in the mixed case

    Louise Sutton, Daniel Tubbenhauer, Paul Wedrich, and Jieru Zhu. SL_2 tilting modules in the mixed case. Selecta Math. (N.S.) , 29(3):39, 2023. arXiv:2105.07724

    2023 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Commutative exact algebras and modular tensor categories, 2024

    Kenichi Shimizu and Harshit Yadav. Commutative exact algebras and modular tensor categories, 2024. arXiv:2408.06314

    2024 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Relative H opf modules- E quivalences and freeness criteria

    Mitsuhiro Takeuchi. Relative H opf modules- E quivalences and freeness criteria. J. Algebra , 60(2):452--471, 1979

    1979

  48. [56]

    S -Structures for k -linear categories and the definition of a modular functor

    Ulrike Tillmann. S -Structures for k -linear categories and the definition of a modular functor . J. Lond. Math. Soc. , 58:208–228, 1998. arXiv:math/9802089

    1998 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.