Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 108 references

Unitary Categorical Symmetries

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proposes that twisted-sector local operators transform in *-representations of the tube algebra of a higher fusion category symmetry, and that these representations are classified by simple objects in the unitary Drinfeld…

desk verdict New 2-group S-matrix formula and a clean tube-algebra proposal for unitary categorical symmetries, but the D>2 classification is asserted rather than proved. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.04440 v2 pith:FXT6IORM submitted 2025-02-06 hep-th math-phmath.CTmath.MPmath.QA

Thomas Bartsch This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thmath-phmath.CTmath.MPmath.QA
keywords non-invertiblesymmetriestubealgebraDrinfeldcenterhigherfusioncategoriesS-matrixunitaryrepresentationstwistedsectoroperators2-group
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

Global invertible symmetries act unitarily on states and observables; this paper aims to extend that statement to non-invertible categorical symmetries. It argues that twisted-sector local operators in any spacetime dimension transform in *-representations of the tube algebra of the symmetry category $\mathcal{C}$, and that the irreducible such representations are classified by simple objects in the unitary Drinfeld center $\mathcal{Z}^{\dagger}(\mathcal{C})$. The construction is carried out explicitly for fusion categories in two dimensions and fusion 2-categories in three dimensions, with worked examples for group, Tambara-Yamagami, Fibonacci, and 2-group symmetries. If correct, the proposal gives a uniform representation-theoretic description of how non-invertible symmetries act on local operators, parallel to the role of unitary group representations.

What carries the argument

The tube algebra $\mathrm{Tube}(\mathcal{C})$, generated by linking a symmetry defect around a twisted-sector local operator, is the central algebraic object; the paper shows it carries a canonical antilinear involution $*$ from reflection, making it a C*-algebra when $\mathcal{C}$ is unitary. The classification is carried by the higher S-matrix of the Drinfeld center $\mathcal{Z}(\mathcal{C})$, a pairing between connected components and fundamental hypergroup elements of the center. Invertibility of this S-matrix and its Verlinde formula ensure that the elements $e^{\mu}_{\rho}$ built from $S^{-1}$ are minimal self-adjoint central idempotents, so they label all irreducible *-representations of the tube algebra.

What would settle it

Compute the higher S-matrix for a concrete unitary fusion 2-category, such as a 2-group symmetry with nontrivial Postnikov class, and check whether it is invertible and satisfies the Verlinde formula; a single category where the matrix is singular or the formula fails would invalidate the classification.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that every unitary action of a higher fusion category symmetry $\mathcal{C}$ on twisted local operators is equivalent to a choice of simple object in the unitary Drinfeld center $\mathcal{Z}^{\dagger}(\mathcal{C})$. The paper constructs the tube algebra $\mathrm{Tube}(\mathcal{C})$ from linking configurations, equips it with a canonical *-involution coming from reflection positivity, and then uses the higher S-matrix of $\mathcal{Z}(\mathcal{C})$ to build minimal self-adjoint central idempotents $e_{\rho}$. These idempotents correspond one-to-one to irreducible *-representations, establishing the equivalence $\mathrm{Rep}^{\dagger}(\mathrm{Tube}(\mathcal{C})) \simeq \Omega_{D-2}(\mathcal{Z}^{\dagger}(\mathcal{C}))$ in arbitrary dimension. In two dimensions this recovers known results, and in three dimensions the paper derives explicit tube algebras and S-matrices for group and 2-group symmetries, including a formula for the minimal central idempotents of the twisted groupoid algebra.

Load-bearing premise

For dimensions greater than two, the argument assumes without proof that the tube algebra of a unitary fusion 2-category is a finite-dimensional C*-algebra with the stated positive functional, and that the higher S-matrix of its Drinfeld center is invertible and satisfies the Verlinde formula, so the minimal central idempotents that label the representations actually exist.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every theory with symmetry $\mathcal{C}$ must assign to each twisted-sector Hilbert space a *-representation of $\mathrm{Tube}(\mathcal{C})$, so correlation functions involving twisted operators are constrained by tube algebra relations.
  • The set of inequivalent unitary actions of $\mathcal{C}$ is exactly the set of simple objects of the unitary Drinfeld center, so representation data of the center determines which twisted sectors can exist.
  • For ordinary finite group symmetry in two dimensions, the construction recovers unitary representations of the twisted Drinfeld double and hence the standard classification of symmetry-twisted sectors.
  • For finite 2-group symmetries in three dimensions, the higher S-matrix is the character table of the extension $A^{\vee} \rtimes G$, and the irreducible *-representations are labelled by pairs $(a, \rho)$; these give the allowed twisted-sector blocks.
  • Unitarity is not automatic: for the non-unitary Yang-Lee category the tube algebra has a representation that is not a *-representation, showing that the classification genuinely uses unitarity of the symmetry category.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the same S-matrix idempotents control boundary operators, then boundary Hilbert spaces of a SymTFT should decompose into the same $(a, \rho)$ blocks, giving a categorical version of block decomposition that could be checked in lattice models.
  • The assumption that the higher S-matrix is invertible may fail for degenerate or non-semisimple centers; such cases would produce twisted sectors not captured by simple objects of $\mathcal{Z}^{\dagger}(\mathcal{C})$, perhaps signalling new phases.
  • The explicit 2-group S-matrix formula could be used as a shortcut to compute fusion of condensation defects in 3+1D TQFTs, avoiding a full 2-representation theory computation.
  • A natural testable extension is to compute the tube algebra for a Tambara-Yamagami fusion 2-category and compare the resulting *-representations with the center classification, which the paper does not do.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper proposes a general framework for unitary actions of non-invertible (higher) fusion category symmetries on twisted sector local operators. The author introduces a *-structure on the tube algebra Tube(C) of a unitary (higher) fusion category, argues that twisted sector local operators transform in *-representations of this algebra, and proposes the classification Rep†(Tube(C)) ≅ Ω_{D−2}(Z†(C)) using a higher S-matrix of the Drinfeld center. The construction is illustrated with D=2 examples (twisted group double D^ω(G), Tambara-Yamagami, and Fibonacci categories) and D=3 examples (ordinary group 2Hilb^π_G and finite 2-group 2Hilb^λ_G), including explicit S-matrices and minimal central idempotents.

Significance. If the proposed equivalence (33) holds, the paper provides a physically natural characterization of unitary actions of higher non-invertible symmetries and a practical computational tool via higher S-matrices. The D=2 examples reproduce known classifications, and the D=3 2-group S-matrix in Eq. (148) is a nontrivial explicit formula that reduces correctly to the ordinary group character table when A is trivial and reproduces the known central idempotents in the ordinary group case. The paper is, however, best read as a well-motivated proposal rather than a proof: the central classification for D>2 rests on several unproved structural properties of the higher S-matrix and of the tube algebra, and the examples that are fully worked out are group-like and therefore do not test the non-invertible higher-categorical input.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section I.B, properties 1–3 and Eqs. (27)–(33)] The central equivalence (33) is derived from the minimal central idempotents e^μ_ρ defined in (30), whose construction requires invertibility of the higher S-matrix and whose idempotence property (31) requires the Verlinde formula (28). For D>2, properties 1–3 of the higher S-matrix are stated without proof and are cited to lecture notes [13,14]; they are not derived from the definitions of the tube algebra or of the Drinfeld center. Since the D=3 examples are group-theoretic (2Hilb^π_G and 2Hilb^λ_G), where the S-matrix is an ordinary character table, they do not provide evidence for these properties for a non-invertible higher fusion category. The authors should either prove properties 1–3 for a nontrivial class of unitary fusion 2-categories or explicitly reformulate (33) as a conjecture, with the precise hypotheses stated.
  2. [Section I.A, Eq. (13) and footnote 8] The claim that Tube(C) is a C*-algebra for D>2 rests on the assertion that the functional F in (13) is positive and faithful. In D=2 this is a theorem (see [17]), but for D>2 positivity/faithfulness is not proved; the 1:1 correspondence between minimal central idempotents and irreducible *-representations used after (32) is a property of finite-dimensional C*-algebras, so this missing positivity is load-bearing. In addition, footnote 8 states that the unitary Drinfeld center Z†(C) is expected to be equivalent to Z(C) for D>2, and this expectation is used implicitly in (33). Both points should be addressed explicitly, either by proof or by clearly listing them as assumptions of the proposal.
  3. [Section I.B, Eq. (29) and the derivation of (31)] The composition rule for the diagonal tube algebra elements z^μ_μ, with coefficients d_x d_y/d_z N^z_xy, is asserted from the linking picture but is not derived from the definition of Tube(C) given in Sections II.B and III.B for D>2. For D=2 this relation is a known theorem (e.g., [18]); for D>2 it is an additional input needed to prove (31) and hence (33). If (29) is intended as the definition of the Verlinde coefficients N^z_xy at higher dimension, this should be stated explicitly, and the compatibility of this definition with the tube algebra multiplication (105) should be checked or at least spelled out as a conjecture.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Section III.C.2, Eqs. (34) and (148)] The condition "gx ∈ Ga" in the abstract's S-matrix formula (34) and in Eq. (148) is ambiguous: it should read "g·x ∈ G_a" or otherwise explicitly indicate that G_a is the stabilizer of a; otherwise the notation can be confused with the group element ga.
  2. [Section II.C.3, Eq. (87)] In the two-dimensional representation R_{1,τ}, the second matrix entry is labelled by the generator (ττ τ τ|1) in the displayed formula, but the same generator label appears twice; presumably the second occurrence should be (ττ τ τ|τ), not (ττ τ 1|1).
  3. [Section II.C.3, tube representations paragraph after Eq. (83)] The phrase "here, a = a± for Fib∓" is confusing because earlier in the section a = a− for Fib+ and a = a+ for Fib−; a clearer statement such as "a = a− for Fib+ and a = a+ for Fib−" would prevent sign errors.
  4. [Section I.B, footnote 8] The sentence "we expect this to hold also in D>2" should be flagged in the introduction as a formal assumption of the proposal, rather than appearing only in a footnote, since it is used in the statement of the main classification (33).
  5. [Section II.C.2, Eqs. (72)–(73)] The notation Δ_x and Δ_ρ for the square roots of the phases is introduced but not defined explicitly; it would be helpful to specify that these are chosen square roots with the displayed branch conventions.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the classification is a conditional derivation from external higher S-matrix input, with explicit checks against independent examples.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is not circular. The tube algebra is constructed explicitly, and the claim that it is a C*-algebra follows from the positive functional F in Eq. (13), a standard structural argument, not from the classification being derived. The central equivalence (33) is obtained by building minimal central idempotents e^mu_rho in Eq. (30) from the inverse S-matrix, using the Verlinde formula (28) and the stated unitarity properties of the S-matrix. These S-matrix properties are taken as external input from the higher S-matrix framework of Refs. [13-15], not fitted or defined in terms of the representations being classified. The 1:1 correspondence between minimal central idempotents and irreducible *-representations is cited to external literature (Refs. [34-36]) and is standard for D=2. The examples provide independent checks: the group case reproduces the known group algebra idempotents, the 2-group case reproduces the twisted groupoid algebra and its irreducible representations, and the Tambara-Yamagami and Fibonacci examples match known results for Ising and related categories. Self-citations such as Ref. [9] for higher tube algebras and Ref. [67] for 2-group symmetries supply background constructions, but the paper re-derives the relevant structures explicitly in the examples, so these citations are not load-bearing in a way that would make the conclusions reduce to the cited claims. The main weakness, that for D>2 the required S-matrix properties 1-3 and the positivity of F are asserted rather than proved and the expected equivalence Z^dag(C) = Z(C) is invoked, is a rigor or completeness gap rather than a circular step: the classification genuinely depends on these external inputs instead of being equivalent to them by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's central classification rests on external higher S-matrix theory, the existence of a positive functional on the tube algebra, and an expected equivalence between unitary and ordinary Drinfeld centers in D>2. No free parameters are fitted to data. The main new computation is the 2-group S-matrix.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Reflection positivity provides a faithful positive functional F on Tube(C), making it a C*-algebra.
    Proved for D=2 in [17], but for D>2 the paper only asserts 'this shows Tube(C) is a C*-algebra' (Section I.A) and later calls it expected (Section IV).
  • domain assumption The higher S-matrix S of Z(C) exists, is invertible, satisfies S_{z∨,ρ} = (S_{z,ρ})*, and satisfies the Verlinde formula.
    Stated as properties 1-3 in Section I.B, cited to [13-15]; used to construct minimal central idempotents e_ρ.
  • ad hoc to paper The unitary Drinfeld center Z†(C) is equivalent to the ordinary Drinfeld center Z(C) for D>2.
    Footnote 8 says 'we expect this to hold also in D>2'; the classification (33) depends on it.
  • standard math Minimal central idempotents of a finite-dimensional C*-algebra are in bijection with its irreducible *-representations.
    Standard result (Artin-Wedderburn), used implicitly to pass from e_ρ to the equivalence (33).
  • domain assumption The SymTFT sandwich construction relates twisted sector local operators to junctions in the bulk and links with Drinfeld center objects.
    Background from [10-12]; used in Eq. (23) to write the action as d_z S_{z,ρ}.
  • domain assumption For the 2-group example, the Drinfeld center of 2Hilb^λ_G equals that of the gauged 0-form symmetry 2Hilb^{⟨.,α⟩}_G̃.
    Gauge invariance of the Drinfeld center, Eq. (135), cited to [60-64,66].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Unitary Categorical Symmetries." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FXT6IORM

@misc{pith2026250204440,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Unitary Categorical Symmetries},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FXT6IORM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.04440}
}
abstract

Global invertible symmetries act unitarily on local observables or states of a quantum system. In this note, we aim to generalise this statement to non-invertible symmetries by considering unitary actions of higher fusion category symmetries $\mathcal{C}$ on twisted sector local operators. We propose that the latter transform in $\ast$-representations of the tube algebra associated to $\mathcal{C}$, which we introduce and classify using the notion of higher $S$-matrices of higher braided fusion categories.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

108 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

  1. [17]

    a representative x of a conjugacy class [ x] ∈ Cl(G),

  2. [18]

    The associated irreducible representation R = R(x,ρ) of 15 Here, we use the notation gx := gxg−1 for the conjugation action of a group element g ∈ G on a group element x ∈ G

    an irreducible representation ρ of the centraliser Gx of x with projective 2-cocycle τx(ω) ∈ Z 2(Gx, U(1)). The associated irreducible representation R = R(x,ρ) of 15 Here, we use the notation gx := gxg−1 for the conjugation action of a group element g ∈ G on a group element x ∈ G. D ω(G) can be constructed via induction [47]: To this end, we fix for each...

  3. [1]

    We consider the tube algebra Tube(C) [7–9] associ- ated to C and show that it canonically possesses the structure of a C*-algebra, provided that the symme- try category C is unitary in an appropriate sense

  4. [2]

    Unitary Categorical Symmetries

    We propose that twisted sector local operators trans- form in ∗-representations of Tube(C), which we con- struct and classify using the Symmetry TFT [10–12] and its associated higher S-matrices [13–15]. While the above is well known in D = 2 [16–18], we pro- vide a general construction for arbitrary D ≥ 2 including several examples in D = 2, 3. A. Backgro...

    work page Pith review arXiv 2025

  5. [3]

    the continuation of ∨ to C[X] defines an algebra anti- isomorphism,

  6. [4]

    Duals: For each symmetry defect A ∈ Cthere ex- ists a dual defect A∨ ∈ Cthat corresponds to the orientation reversal of A obtained by “bending” the topological defect A around, (16)

  7. [5]

    A convenient tool to characterise and classify irreducible ∗-representations of the tube algebra is the so-called sandwich construction [10–12]

    Daggers: For each local junction Θ inC, there exists its dagger Θ† which corresponds to the reflection of Θ about a fixed hyperplane 7, (17) Furthermore, we require the above structures to be com- patible with one another in an appropriate sense in order for the involution ∗ on Tube(C) to be well-defined. A convenient tool to characterise and classify irr...

  8. [6]

    setting x · y := P z N z xy · z defines an associative al- gebra structure on C[X],

Show all 108 references
  1. [7]

    the distinguished element e ∈ X acts as a unit for the above algebra,

  2. [8]

    Bullivant and C

    A. Bullivant and C. Delcamp, Tube algebras, excitations statistics and compactification in gauge models of topological phases, JHEP 10 (2019) 216, [arXiv:1905.08673]

    2019 arXiv

  3. [9]

    Using this, the unit of Tube(C) can be written as 3 = X [µ] ∈ πD−2(C) 1µ µ Idµ , (6) where 1 ∈ Cdenotes the monoidal unit in C

    for generalisations to higher D). Using this, the unit of Tube(C) can be written as 3 = X [µ] ∈ πD−2(C) 1µ µ Idµ , (6) where 1 ∈ Cdenotes the monoidal unit in C. Twisted sector local operators O then transform in linear repre- sentations of the tube algebra, which can be const...

  4. [10]

    for all x, y∈ X, we have N e xy ̸= 0 ⇔ y = x∨,

  5. [11]

    for all x, y∈ X, we have P z N z xy = 1. For the purposes of this note, the utility of the of the S-matrix stems from the fact that it captures diagonal actions of the tube algebra on twisted sector local oper- ators as in (23). In fact, the latter are sufficient to de- termin...

  6. [12]

    pairs ( x, χ) consisting of a representative of a conju- gacy class [x] ∈ Cl(G) and a character χ ∈ (Ax)∨ on the subgroup Ax ⊂ A of x-invariant 1-form defects,

  7. [13]

    pairs ( a, ρ) consisting of a representative of a G-orbit [a] ∈ A/G in A and an irreducible representation ρ of the stabiliser subgroup Ga ⊂ G of a, and τ (λ) denotes the transgression of a mixed ’t Hooft anomaly11 [λ] ∈ H 2(G, A∨) between G and A. II. TWO DIMENSIONS In this s...

  8. [14]

    The assign- ment A 7→ A∨ then extends to an op-monoidal func- tor12 ∨ : C → Cop

    Dual structure: A dual structure on C allows us to bend topological line defects around in the sense that for each A ∈ Cthere exists a dual object A∨ ∈ Cto- gether with evaluation and coevaluation morphisms (37) satisfying suitable zig-zag relations [39]. The assign- ment A 7→...

  9. [15]

    We assume this †-structure to be compat- ible with the monoidal structure on C in the sense that ⊗ : C × C → Cis a †-functor13 with unitary coherence data 14

    Dagger structure: A †-structure on C allows us to reflect topological junctions in the sense that there exists a functor † : C → Cop that acts as the identity on objects and anti-linearly on morphisms via (39) such that †2 = idC and End C(A) is a C*-algebra for all A ∈ C. We a...

  10. [16]

    Group Symmetry We first consider the symmetry category C = Hilbω G cor- responding to a finite group G with ’t Hooft anomaly [ω] ∈ H 3(G, U(1)). Simple objects in C are given by group elements g ∈ G that fuse according to the group law of G with associator (51) The duals and d...

  11. [19]

    Tambara-Yamagami Symmetry As a second example, let us consider a symmetry category C = TY χ,s A of Tambara-Yamagami type [48], which is specified by the following pieces of data:

  12. [20]

    A finite abelian group A,

  13. [21]

    symmetric bicharacter χ : A × A → U (1),

    a non-deg. symmetric bicharacter χ : A × A → U (1),

  14. [22]

    a square-root s of 1/|A|. The simple objects of C consist of group elements a ∈ A together with a non-invertible defect m, which are sub- ject to the fusion rules a ⊗ b = a · b , a ⊗ m = m ⊗ a = m , m ⊗ m = M a ∈ A a . (66) 8 The non-trivial components of the associator are (6...

  15. [23]

    (75) The pentagon equation then admits the following solu- tion for the associator [52], (76) where the self-inverse (2 ×2)-matrix A is given by A = Ç −a 1/λ −aλ a å

    Fibonacci Symmetry As a last example, we consider a symmetry category C with only two simple objects, 1 and τ , whose fusion rules are given by τ ⊗ τ = 1 ⊕ τ . (75) The pentagon equation then admits the following solu- tion for the associator [52], (76) where the self-inverse ...

  16. [24]

    Dual structure: A dual structure on C allows us to bend both topological surfaces and lines around. Concretely, it consists of the following pieces of data: • A choice of (1-)dual object A∨1 ∈ Cfor every ob- ject A ∈ Ctogether with evaluation and coevalu- ation 1-morphisms (91...

  17. [25]

    Dagger structure: A †-structure on C allows us to reflect topological junctions about a fixed hyper- plane. Concretely, there is a 2-functor † : C → C2op that acts as the identity on objects and 1-morphisms and anti-linearly on 2-morphisms via (96) 18 We denote by C2op the 2-c...

  18. [26]

    In this case, the associ- ated tube algebra is simply the group algebra C[G] of G with ∗-structure given by inversion [9]

    Group Symmetry Let us first consider the fusion 2-category 26 C = 2Hilbπ G corresponding to a finite group symmetry G with ’t Hooft anomaly [ π] ∈ H 4(G, U(1)). In this case, the associ- ated tube algebra is simply the group algebra C[G] of G with ∗-structure given by inversio...

  19. [27]

    2-Group Symmetry As a second example, let us consider C = 2Hilb λ G corre- sponding to a finite anomalous 2-group symmetry [37, 38] G = A[1] ⋊α G that is specified by the following data:

  20. [28]

    a finite 0-form symmetry group G,

  21. [29]

    a finite abelian 1-form symmetry group A,

  22. [30]

    a group action 27 ▷ : G → Aut(A),

  23. [31]

    a Postnikov class [ α] ∈ H 3 ▷(G, A),

  24. [32]

    a mixed ’t Hooft anomaly [ λ] ∈ H 2 ▷(G, A∨). T ube algebra: As demonstrated in [9], the tube alge- bra associated to 2Hilb λ G is the twisted groupoid algebra Cε(λ)[A/ /G] with generators gga a (g ∈ G, a∈ A) that multiply according to gga a ◦ hhb b = δa,hb · εb(g, h) · ghghb ...

  25. [33]

    a group element a ∈ A, viewed as a character on the Pontryagin dual group A∨,

  26. [34]

    The corresponding irreducible representation bρ of “G is then given by bρ = Ind “G “Ga (a ⊗ ρ) , (141) 15 where we defined “Ga := A∨ ⋊λ Ga

    an irreducible representation ρ of the stabiliser Ga := {g ∈ G | ga = a} of a with projective 2-co- cycle ⟨λ, a⟩ ∈Z 2(Ga, U(1)). The corresponding irreducible representation bρ of “G is then given by bρ = Ind “G “Ga (a ⊗ ρ) , (141) 15 where we defined “Ga := A∨ ⋊λ Ga. Two such...

  27. [35]

    a group element a ∈ A,

  28. [36]

    an irreducible representation ρ of Ga with projective 2-cocycle εa(λ) ∈ Z 2(Ga, U(1)). In particular, since there is a one-to-one correspondence between minimal central idempotents and irreducible representations of the tube algebra, we see that the lat- ter are labelled by th...

  29. [37]

    E. P. Wigner, Gruppentheorie und ihre Anwendung auf die Quantenmechanik der Atomspektren . Vieweg Verlag, Braunschweig, 1931

    1931

  30. [38]

    Etingof, D

    P. Etingof, D. Nikshych, and V. Ostrik, On fusion categories, math/0203060

    arXiv

  31. [39]

    Gaiotto, A

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

    2015 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Bhardwaj, L

    L. Bhardwaj, L. E. Bottini, S. Schafer-Nameki, and A. Tiwari, Non-invertible higher-categorical symmetries, SciPost Phys. 14 (2023), no. 1 007, [ arXiv:2204.06564]

    2023 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Shao, What’s Done Cannot Be Undone: TASI Lectures on Non-Invertible Symmetries , arXiv:2308.00747

    S.-H. Shao, What’s Done Cannot Be Undone: TASI Lectures on Non-Invertible Symmetries , arXiv:2308.00747

    arXiv

  34. [42]

    Schafer-Nameki, ICTP lectures on (non-)invertible generalized symmetries, Phys

    S. Schafer-Nameki, ICTP lectures on (non-)invertible generalized symmetries, Phys. Rept. 1063 (2024) 1–55, [arXiv:2305.18296]

    2024 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Ocneanu, Chirality for operator algebras , World Sci

    A. Ocneanu, Chirality for operator algebras , World Sci. Publ. (1994) 39–63

    1994

  36. [44]

    Bartsch, M

    T. Bartsch, M. Bullimore, and A. Grigoletto, Representation theory for categorical symmetries , arXiv:2305.17165

    arXiv

  37. [45]

    Gaiotto and J

    D. Gaiotto and J. Kulp, Orbifold groupoids, JHEP 02 (2021) 132, [ arXiv:2008.05960]

    2021 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Apruzzi, F

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

    2023 arXiv

  39. [47]

    D. S. Freed, G. W. Moore, and C. Teleman, Topological symmetry in quantum field theory , arXiv:2209.07471

    arXiv

  40. [48]

    Higher S-matrices

    T. Johnson-Freyd, “Higher S-matrices.” Higher Structures and Field Theory Seminar, 2021, http://categorified.net/S-matrices.pdf

    2021

  41. [49]

    Higher S-matrices and higher modular categories

    D. Reutter, “Higher S-matrices and higher modular categories.” 2022 workshop on Global Categorical Symmetries, Perimeter Institute, https://drive.google.com/file/d/ 1n6uwJtcsMRRfMiX75cp79JcAb4kESsVM/view. 17

    2022

  42. [50]

    Johnson-Freyd and D

    T. Johnson-Freyd and D. Reutter, Minimal nondegenerate extensions, J. Am. Math. Soc. 37 (2023), no. 1 81–150, [ arXiv:2105.15167]

    2023

  43. [51]

    Neshveyev and M

    S. Neshveyev and M. Yamashita, A Few Remarks on the Tube Algebra of a Monoidal Category , Proceedings of the Edinburgh Mathematical Society 61 (May, 2018) 735–758

    2018

  44. [52]

    Izumi, The structure of sectors associated with Longo-Rehren inclusions

    M. Izumi, The structure of sectors associated with Longo-Rehren inclusions. I: General theory , Commun. Math. Phys. 213 (2000) 127–179

    2000

  45. [53]

    Y.-H. Lin, M. Okada, S. Seifnashri, and Y. Tachikawa, Asymptotic density of states in 2d CFTs with non-invertible symmetries , JHEP 03 (2023) 094, [arXiv:2208.05495]

    2023 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Osterwalder and R

    K. Osterwalder and R. Schrader, Axioms for Euclidean Green ’s Functions, Commun. Math. Phys. 31 (1973) 83–112

    1973

  47. [55]

    Osterwalder and R

    K. Osterwalder and R. Schrader, Axioms for Euclidean Green ’s Functions. 2., Commun. Math. Phys. 42 (1975) 281

    1975

  48. [56]

    Jaffe, Reflection Positivity Then and Now , arXiv:1802.07880

    A. Jaffe, Reflection Positivity Then and Now , arXiv:1802.07880

    arXiv

  49. [57]

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

    2021 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Ferrer, B

    G. Ferrer, B. Hungar, T. Johnson-Freyd, C. Krulewski, L. M¨ uller, Nivedita, D. Penneys, D. Reutter, C. Scheimbauer, L. Stehouwer, and C. Vuppulury, Dagger n-categories, arXiv:2403.01651

  51. [59]

    V. G. Turaev and O. Y. Viro, State sum invariants of 3 manifolds and quantum 6j symbols , Topology 31 (1992) 865–902

    1992

  52. [60]

    V. G. Turaev, Quantum invariants of knots and three manifolds, vol. 18. 1994

    1994

  53. [61]

    J. W. Barrett and B. W. Westbury, Invariants of piecewise linear three manifolds, Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 348 (1996) 3997–4022, [ hep-th/9311155]

    1996 arXiv

  54. [62]

    J. W. Barrett and B. W. Westbury, Spherical categories, Adv. Math. 143 (1999) 357–375, [ hep-th/9310164]

    1999 arXiv

  55. [63]

    C. L. Douglas and D. J. Reutter, Fusion 2-categories and a state-sum invariant for 4-manifolds , arXiv:1812.11933

    arXiv

  56. [64]

    Galindo, On braided and ribbon unitary fusion categories, Canadian Mathematical Bulletin 57 (2014), no

    C. Galindo, On braided and ribbon unitary fusion categories, Canadian Mathematical Bulletin 57 (2014), no. 3 506–510

    2014

  57. [65]

    Etingof, S

    P. Etingof, S. Gelaki, D. Nikshych, and V. Ostrik, Tensor Categories. Mathematical surveys and monographs. American Mathematical Society, 2017

    2017

  58. [66]

    W. R. Bloom and H. Heyer, Harmonic Analysis of Probability Measures on Hypergroups. De Gruyter, Berlin, New York, 1995

    1995

  59. [67]

    Sunder and N

    V. Sunder and N. Wildberger, Actions of finite hypergroups, Journal of Algebraic Combinatorics 18 (09,

  60. [68]

    Kaidi, Y

    J. Kaidi, Y. Tachikawa, and H. Y. Zhang, On a class of selection rules without group actions in field theory and string theory, SciPost Phys. 17 (2024), no. 6 169, [arXiv:2402.00105]

    2024 arXiv

  61. [69]

    S. Popa, D. Shlyakhtenko, and S. Vaes, Cohomology and L2-Betti Numbers for Subfactors and Quasi-Regular Inclusions, International Mathematics Research Notices 2018 (01, 2017) 2241–2331

    2018

  62. [70]

    Gruen and S

    A. Gruen and S. Morrison, Computing modular data for pointed fusion categories., Indiana Univ. Math. J. 70 (2021), no. 2 561–593

    2021

  63. [71]

    Hardiman and A

    L. Hardiman and A. King, Decomposing the Tube Category, Glasgow Mathematical Journal 62 (2020), no. 2 441–458

    2020

  64. [72]

    J. C. Baez and A. D. Lauda, Higher-dimensional algebra. V: 2-Groups , Theory and Applications of Categories 12 (2004) 423–491, [ math/0307200]

    2004 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Benini, C

    F. Benini, C. C´ ordova, and P.-S. Hsin,On 2-Group Global Symmetries and their Anomalies , JHEP 03 (2019) 118, [ arXiv:1803.09336]

    2019 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Bakalov and A

    B. Bakalov and A. Kirillov, Lectures on tensor categories and modular functors , Amer. Math. Soc. Univ. Lect. Ser. 21 (01, 2001)

    2001

  67. [75]

    Unitary fusion categories

    D. Penneys, “Unitary fusion categories.” Lecture Notes, 2021, https://people.math.osu.edu/penneys.2/8800/ Notes/FusionCats.pdf

    2021

  68. [76]

    Penneys, Unitary dual functors for unitary multitensor categories, Higher Structures (2018)

    D. Penneys, Unitary dual functors for unitary multitensor categories, Higher Structures (2018)

    2018

  69. [77]

    Bhowmick, S

    J. Bhowmick, S. K. Ghosh, N. Rakshit, and M. Yamashita, Tube representations and twisting of graded categories, arXiv: Quantum Algebra (2018)

    2018

  70. [78]

    Drinfeld, Quasi-Hopf algebras, Algebra i Analiz 6 (1989) 114–148

    V. Drinfeld, Quasi-Hopf algebras, Algebra i Analiz 6 (1989) 114–148

    1989

  71. [79]

    Majid, Doubles of quasitriangular hopf algebras , Communications in Algebra 19 (1991) 3061–3073

    S. Majid, Doubles of quasitriangular hopf algebras , Communications in Algebra 19 (1991) 3061–3073

    1991

  72. [80]

    Roche, V

    P. Roche, V. Pasquier, and R. Dijkgraaf, QuasiHopf algebras, group cohomology and orbifold models , Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. 18 (1990) 60–72

    1990

  73. [81]

    Davydov and D

    A. Davydov and D. Simmons, On lagrangian algebras in group-theoretical braided fusion categories, Journal of Algebra 471 (2017) 149–175

    2017

  74. [82]

    Willerton, The twisted Drinfeld double of a finite group via gerbes and finite groupoids , Algebr

    S. Willerton, The twisted Drinfeld double of a finite group via gerbes and finite groupoids , Algebr. Geom. Topol. 8 (2008), no. 3 1419–1457. 18

    2008

  75. [83]

    Tambara and S

    D. Tambara and S. Yamagami, Tensor Categories with Fusion Rules of Self-Duality for Finite Abelian Groups , J. Algebra 209 (1998), no. 2 692–707

    1998

  76. [84]

    Gelaki, D

    S. Gelaki, D. Naidu, and D. Nikshych, Centers of graded fusion categories, arXiv:0905.3117

    arXiv

  77. [85]

    Chang, Y.-H

    C.-M. Chang, Y.-H. Lin, S.-H. Shao, Y. Wang, and X. Yin, Topological Defect Lines and Renormalization Group Flows in Two Dimensions , JHEP 01 (2019) 026, [arXiv:1802.04445]

    2019 arXiv

  78. [86]

    Thorngren and Y

    R. Thorngren and Y. Wang, Fusion category symmetry. Part I. Anomaly in-flow and gapped phases , JHEP 04 (2024) 132, [ arXiv:1912.02817]

    2024 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Davydov and T

    A. Davydov and T. Booker, Commutative Algebras in Fibonacci Categories, arXiv:1103.3537

    arXiv

  80. [88]

    Longo and J

    R. Longo and J. E. Roberts, A Theory of Dimension , K Theory 11 (1997) 103–159, [ funct-an/9604008]

    1997 arXiv

  81. [89]

    Q. Chen, R. Hern´ andez Palomares, C. Jones, and D. Penneys, Q-system completion for C ∗ 2-categories, J. Funct. Anal. 283 (2022) 109524, [ arXiv:2105.12010]

    2022

  82. [90]

    J. C. Baez, Higher-Dimensional Algebra II: 2-Hilbert Spaces, Advances in Mathematics 127 (1997), no. 2 125–189, [q-alg/9609018]

    1997 arXiv

  83. [91]

    L. Kong, Y. Tian, and S. Zhou, The center of monoidal 2-categories in 3+1D Dijkgraaf-Witten theory , Adv. Math. 360 (2020) 106928, [ arXiv:1905.04644]

    2020 arXiv

  84. [92]

    Ganter and M

    N. Ganter and M. Kapranov, Representation and character theory in 2-categories , Advances in Mathematics 217 (2008), no. 5 2268–2300, [math/0602510]

    2008 arXiv

  85. [93]

    Elgueta, Representation theory of 2-groups on Kapranov and Voevodsky’s 2-vector spaces, Advances in Mathematics 213 (2007), no

    J. Elgueta, Representation theory of 2-groups on Kapranov and Voevodsky’s 2-vector spaces, Advances in Mathematics 213 (2007), no. 1 53–92, [ math/0408120]

    2007 arXiv

  86. [94]

    A. M. Osorno, Explicit formulas for 2-characters , Topology and its Applications 157 (2010), no. 2 369–377, [arXiv:0904.4414]

    2010 arXiv

  87. [95]

    Bartsch, M

    T. Bartsch, M. Bullimore, A. E. V. Ferrari, and J. Pearson, Non-invertible symmetries and higher representation theory I, SciPost Phys. 17 (2024), no. 1 015, [arXiv:2208.05993]

    2024 arXiv

  88. [96]

    Bhardwaj, S

    L. Bhardwaj, S. Schafer-Nameki, and J. Wu, Universal Non-Invertible Symmetries , Fortsch. Phys. 70 (2022), no. 11 2200143, [ arXiv:2208.05973]

    2022 arXiv

  89. [97]

    Bartsch, M

    T. Bartsch, M. Bullimore, A. E. V. Ferrari, and J. Pearson, Non-invertible symmetries and higher representation theory II, SciPost Phys. 17 (2024), no. 2 067, [arXiv:2212.07393]

    2024 arXiv

  90. [98]

    Bhardwaj, S

    L. Bhardwaj, S. Schafer-Nameki, and A. Tiwari, Unifying constructions of non-invertible symmetries , SciPost Phys. 15 (2023), no. 3 122, [ arXiv:2212.06159]

    2023 arXiv

  91. [99]

    Bhardwaj, L

    L. Bhardwaj, L. E. Bottini, S. Schafer-Nameki, and A. Tiwari, Non-invertible symmetry webs , SciPost Phys. 15 (2023), no. 4 160, [ arXiv:2212.06842]

    2023 arXiv

  92. [100]

    G. J. Janusz, Primitive idempotents in group algebras , Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society 17 (1966), no. 2 520–523

    1966

  93. [101]

    T. D. D´ ecoppet and M. Yu,Fiber 2-Functors and Tambara-Yamagami Fusion 2-Categories, arXiv:2306.08117

    arXiv

  94. [102]

    Bartsch, On Unitary 2-Group Symmetries , arXiv:2411.05067

    T. Bartsch, On Unitary 2-Group Symmetries , arXiv:2411.05067

    arXiv

  95. [103]

    Cordova, N

    C. Cordova, N. Holfester, and K. Ohmori, Representation Theory of Solitons , arXiv:2408.11045

    arXiv

  96. [104]

    Y. Choi, B. C. Rayhaun, and Y. Zheng, Generalized Tube Algebras, Symmetry-Resolved Partition Functions, and Twisted Boundary States , arXiv:2409.02159

  97. [105]

    Bhardwaj, C

    L. Bhardwaj, C. Copetti, D. Pajer, and S. Schafer-Nameki, Boundary SymTFT , arXiv:2409.02166

    arXiv

  98. [106]

    Huang and M

    S.-J. Huang and M. Cheng, Topological holography, quantum criticality, and boundary states , arXiv:2310.16878

    arXiv

  99. [107]

    Copetti, Defect Charges, Gapped Boundary Conditions, and the Symmetry TFT , arXiv:2408.01490

    C. Copetti, Defect Charges, Gapped Boundary Conditions, and the Symmetry TFT , arXiv:2408.01490

    arXiv

  100. [108]

    Copetti, L

    C. Copetti, L. Cordova, and S. Komatsu, S-matrix bootstrap and non-invertible symmetries , JHEP 03 (2025) 204, [ arXiv:2408.13132]

    2025 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.