Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

An Algebraic Theory of Gapped Domain Wall Partons

T0 review · 4 major / 4 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 claims that entanglement-bootstrap parton sectors are the fusion channels of composite domain walls—indecomposable bimodule subcategories—and that the neutral parton sector is a unitary modular tensor category.

desk verdict A genuinely new categorical dictionary for partons, but the bridge from entanglement data to fusion channels is asserted, not derived; worth refereeing, not yet citable as fact. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.22544 v1 pith:H3JMBSQ6 submitted 2025-06-27 cond-mat.str-el hep-thmath-phmath.MPmath.QAquant-ph

Matthew Buican , Roman Geiko , Milo Moses , Bowen Shi This is my paper
classification cond-mat.str-elhep-thmath-phmath.MPmath.QAquant-ph
keywords entanglementbootstrapgappeddomainwallspartonsectorsbimodulecategoriesunitaryfusiontopologicalordergeneralizedsymmetriesSymTFT
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 claims that the 'parton' quantum numbers discovered in the entanglement bootstrap of gapped domain walls are algebraic objects rather than merely entropic labels. For a domain wall defect $F: M \to N$ between two topological phases, the N-type parton is the image of the induced bimodule functor $F: \mathcal{D} \to M^* \boxtimes_{\mathcal{C}} N$ and the U-type parton is the image of $F: \mathcal{C} \to N \boxtimes_{\mathcal{D}} M^*$; these images are indecomposable bimodule subcategories, and the correspondence is bijective. If correct, parton sectors are exactly the fusion channels a composite domain wall can take, and the neutral parton sector $E^{[1,1]}$ is a unitary modular tensor category. The paper also proves a universal quantum-dimension identity, $d_n^2 d_u^2 = \frac{\sum_{F\in L^{[n,u]}_O} d_F^2}{\sum_{F\in L^{[1,1]}_O} d_F^2}$, for all unitary fusion categories and indecomposable bimodules.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the 'pinching trick,' a sequence of topological manipulations that folds a domain wall into a finite-width slice, moves the defect away, and turns the half-annular region used to define parton sectors into a disk overlapping a composite domain wall $M^* \boxtimes_{\mathcal{C}} N$. The information in that region is then the fusion channel of the composite wall, and Frobenius reciprocity—the standard adjunction converting a bimodule functor $F: M \to N$ into bimodule functors $\mathcal{D} \to M^* \boxtimes_{\mathcal{C}} N$ and $\mathcal{C} \to N \boxtimes_{\mathcal{D}} M^*$—supplies the maps whose images give the partons $n_F$ and $u_F$. The proof of Theorem 3 uses the Grothendieck-ring element $R^{[n,u]} = \sum_{F\in L^{[n,u]}_O} d_F [F]$ and a lemma from braided fusion category theory to derive the quantum-dimension identity.

What would settle it

Find a lattice model (e.g., a string-net model) with a gapped domain wall defect whose composite-wall fusion channel can be computed, measure the half-annular reduced density matrices around the defect, and compare the resulting parton sectors with the indecomposable bimodule subcategories of $M^* \boxtimes_{\mathcal{C}} N$; if any half-annulus state is compatible with more than one fusion channel, the dictionary in Table II fails. Equivalently, any pair of unitary fusion categories and an indecomposable bimodule category for which Eq. (13) fails would disprove Theorem 3.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is a dictionary between two languages. In the entanglement bootstrap, a domain wall defect $F$ carries two finer quantum numbers, the N-type and U-type parton sectors, read off from half-annular reduced density matrices around the defect. In category theory, the two bulk phases are unitary fusion categories $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{D}$, the domain walls are indecomposable $(\mathcal{C},\mathcal{D})$-bimodule categories $M$ and $N$, and the defect is an irreducible bimodule functor $F: M \to N$. The paper identifies the N-type parton with $n_F = \mathrm{Im}(F: \mathcal{D} \to M^* \boxtimes_{\mathcal{C}} N)$ and the U-type parton with $u_F = \mathrm{Im}(F: \mathcal{C} \to N \boxtimes_{\mathcal{D}} M^*)$, where $M^*$ is the orientation-reversed wall and $\boxtimes_{\mathcal{C}}$ is the relative Deligne tensor product. Under this identification, parton sectors correspond one-to-one to indecomposable bimodule subcategories of composite domain walls, and the neutral component $E^{[1,1]}$ acquires a non-degenerate braiding, making it a unitary modular tensor category equivalent to a Drinfeld center. Theorem 3 states that the entanglement-bootstrap quantum-dimension formula, Eq. (13), holds for every pair of unitary fusion categories and every indecomposable bimodule category.

Load-bearing premise

The argument depends on the pinch: the half-annular reduced density matrices that define parton sectors carry exactly the same information as the fusion channel of the composite domain wall $M^* \boxtimes_{\mathcal{C}} N$ after the manipulations of Fig. 2, a claim argued by pictures and a gedanken experiment rather than proved from the entanglement-bootstrap axioms or from category theory.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Parton sectors are not additional data beyond the fusion data: measuring an N-type parton is the same operation as resolving a composite domain wall $M^* \boxtimes_{\mathcal{C}} N$ into its indecomposable sub-bimodules.
  • The neutral parton sector $E^{[1,1]}$ is a unitary modular tensor category, so the excitations that can be pulled into the bulk on either side of the wall carry a non-degenerate braiding and are described by the Drinfeld center of a unitary fusion category.
  • The quantum-dimension identity (13) is valid for all unitary fusion categories $\mathcal{C},\mathcal{D}$ and all indecomposable $(\mathcal{C},\mathcal{D})$-bimodule categories $M$, providing a universal consistency check for the categorical dictionary.
  • Partons acquire a spacetime meaning: N-type partons are the simple surfaces appearing in the fusion of $M^*$ with $N$, and in the SymTFT description they label twisted-sector operators at interfaces between two quantum field theories.
  • The same dictionary extends to Witt non-trivial topological orders using A-enriched fusion categories and A-centered bimodule categories, so partons are not restricted to string-net models.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the dictionary is right, parton quantum numbers can be computed directly from category theory, so classifying all possible parton sectors in a given pair of phases reduces to classifying indecomposable sub-bimodules of composite walls; this could turn parton searches into an algebraic classification problem.
  • The unproved nature of the pinching trick suggests a concrete lattice test: build a string-net state with a defect whose composite-wall fusion sector is known, and check that the half-annulus reduced density matrix reproduces exactly that sector; a mismatch would break Table II.
  • The SymTFT relation implies that parton quantum numbers may constrain renormalization group flows in non-topological interfaces, since partons are carried by twisted-sector operators that survive dimension reduction; the authors leave this as a future direction.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a categorical description of the 'parton' quantum numbers introduced in the entanglement-bootstrap approach to gapped domain walls. For a defect F: M → N between (C,D)-bimodule categories, the N-type parton sector is identified with the image n_F = Im(F: D → M* ⊠_C N), and the U-type parton sector with u_F = Im(F: C → N ⊠_D M*). This dictionary is motivated by a 'pinching trick' that maps half-annular entanglement data to fusion channels of a composite domain wall. The paper further claims that the neutral parton sector E[1,1] carries a non-degenerate braiding (Propositions 1 and 2), and proves a quantum-dimension consistency formula (Theorem 3, Eq. (13)). Appendices extend the discussion to Witt non-trivial orders, give condensation and Chern-Simons examples, and translate some predictions into explicit entanglement-bootstrap entropy conditions.

Significance. If the proposed dictionary is correct, it gives categorical meaning to entanglement-bootstrap parton sectors, connects them to domain-wall fusion and generalized symmetries, and yields concrete, testable predictions (e.g., Eqs. (C4), (C7), (C8)). The paper contains a genuine proof of Theorem 3, a non-trivial consistency condition for fusion categories, and careful examples. These are real strengths. However, the central claim is conditional: the pinching trick is described pictorially and by a gedanken experiment rather than derived from entanglement-bootstrap axioms or from the Kitaev-Kong dictionary. The significance of the paper as an 'algebraic theory' is therefore prospective; at present it is a well-motivated proposal with strong internal consistency checks.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. III, Fig. 2] The central bijection in Table II is not established. The claim that the half-annular reduced density matrix, after the pinching manipulations, carries exactly the fusion-channel information of M* ⊠_C N is argued by pictures and a gedanken experiment, not derived from the entanglement-bootstrap axioms or from category theory. Appendix C translates the assertion into entropy conditions (δ0, δ1, ΔN, ΔU), but it does not prove that the resulting information-convex sectors are in bijection with fusion channels of the composite domain wall. Since Eqs. (2)-(3) and Table II rest on this step, the pinching trick needs either a derivation or an explicit statement that the dictionary is a conjecture.
  2. [Sec. IV, after Eq. (2)] The assertion that Im(F: D → M* ⊠_C N) is 'straightforward to verify' as an indecomposable bimodule subcategory is load-bearing: the dictionary identifies the N-type parton n_F with this image. The paper does not provide the verification or a reference. Please supply the argument that irreducibility of the original bimodule functor F forces its image under Frobenius reciprocity to be an indecomposable bimodule subcategory, or state this as an additional assumption.
  3. [Sec. V, Eq. (5)] The direct-sum decomposition E = ⊕_{n,u} E[n,u] is asserted without proof. This decomposition is used in the proof of Theorem 3, where Eq. (16) compares terms in the span of L[n,u]_O. Without a proof that every simple object of E lies in a unique E[n,u] (or that the tensor product maps E[n,1] ⊠ E[1,u] into E[n,u] with the claimed direct-sum property), Theorem 3 is incomplete. Please either prove the decomposition or state it as an explicit assumption and check it in the examples.
  4. [Sec. VI, Eq. (14) and Appendix C1] The paper does not prove that the categorical parton quantum dimensions defined by Eq. (14) coincide with the entanglement-bootstrap quantum dimensions. Appendix C1 defines d_n via the entropy formula (C1), but no argument is given that (C1) equals the categorical ratio in (14) for M = N, and for M ≠ N the paper explicitly leaves the comparison for the future. Since the physical claim that partons are categorical data includes their quantum dimensions, this equality must either be proved or clearly labeled as a conjecture. Theorem 3 is an internal consistency result conditional on the dictionary; it does not by itself supply the missing physical link.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 2 caption] The caption does not define the labels M, M*, N, or the distinguished region; a more explicit caption describing each step of the pinching would make the argument much easier to follow.
  2. [Sec. V, Eq. (4)] The notation E[•,1] and E[1,•] is introduced before the reader is told that the '1' subcategories are generated by the identity bimodule functor; please move the definition of 1 ∈ L_N and 1 ∈ L_U before the display.
  3. [Sec. VII, Table III] The table says N-type partons correspond to 'simple topological surfaces in fusion of M* and N', while the second row says U-type partons correspond to 'simple topological surfaces in fusion of N and M*'; since these are the same composite unless orientation is meant, please clarify the intended difference between the two rows.
  4. [Appendix C, Sec. C3] The derivation of (C8) via Fig. 13 is sketched rather than proved; please either provide a complete argument or mark (C8) as a prediction supported by examples, consistent with the paper's own statement that some proofs are omitted for brevity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the categorical dictionary and Theorem 3 are proposed and proved rather than derived from their conclusions; the unproved pinching premise is a physical gap, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The central dictionary (Table II, Eqs. (2)-(3)) is a proposal: the pinching trick of Sec. III identifies half-annular parton data with fusion-channel data of M*⊠_C N by a geometric gedanken argument, which is an unproved physical premise rather than a reduction of the conclusion into the inputs. The identification n_F=Im(F) and u_F=Im(F) is stated after the pinching premise and is the dictionary itself, not a circular derivation. Theorem 3 is a genuine category-theoretic proof using the external Lemma 3.38 of [20]; although Eq. (13) is imported from the authors' prior entanglement-bootstrap paper [3] and d_n and d_u are defined via Eq. (14), the theorem verifies consistency rather than assuming it, and the categorical derivation does not depend on fitting any quantity to the entanglement-bootstrap entropy data. The equality between the entanglement-bootstrap entropy definition (C1) and the categorical ratio (14) is asserted, with the M≠N generalization left to future work; that is an unverified identification and a correctness risk, not a circular step. Self-citations [3] supply definitions and an equation from a prior, externally falsifiable first-principles paper; they are not fitted to this paper's outputs and are not the sole justification of the central claim. Therefore no step reduces by construction to its own input.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard categorical machinery (Kitaev-Kong dictionary, Frobenius reciprocity, relative Deligne tensor products) and on the unproved pinching-trick identification between entanglement bootstrap parton sectors and fusion channels. The dimension formula (13) uses Eq. (14) as a definition, so it is an internal consistency result pending proof that these dimensions equal the entropy-based ones from [3]. No free parameters or fitted constants appear, and no new physical degrees of freedom are introduced.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The Kitaev-Kong dictionary: bulk phases are unitary fusion categories, gapped domain walls are indecomposable bimodule categories, and defects are irreducible bimodule functors.
    Adopted at the start of Sec IV and restricts the main text to Levin-Wen string-net phases, as the authors state. The dictionary is the framework within which partons are defined.
  • domain assumption The pinching trick preserves the information in the half-annular entanglement regions, so parton sectors correspond to fusion channels of the composite domain wall.
    This geometric identification, presented in Sec III and Figs. 2-3, is the bridge between entanglement bootstrap partons and the categorical dictionary. It is argued but not proven.
  • ad hoc to paper The image of an irreducible bimodule functor under Frobenius reciprocity is an indecomposable bimodule subcategory.
    Stated as 'straightforward to verify' in Sec IV after Eq. (2), with no proof supplied. The dictionary and the fusion-channel interpretation of partons depend on this claim.
  • standard math External categorical results: [19, Prop. 3.6] (bimodule decomposition by condensable algebras), [20, Prop. 2.34] and [20, Lemma 3.38] (used in Theorem 3).
    The proofs of Proposition 2 and Theorem 3 reduce to these cited lemmas, which are not restated in the paper. Their correctness is assumed from the literature.
  • domain assumption Every gapped domain wall decomposes as a condensation wall, an invertible wall, and a reverse condensation wall (Fig. 4).
    Used in Sec V to argue that the braiding on E^{1,1} is non-degenerate. The paper points to ref [18] rather than proving the decomposition.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of An Algebraic Theory of Gapped Domain Wall Partons." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/H3JMBSQ6

@misc{pith2026250622544,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: An Algebraic Theory of Gapped Domain Wall Partons},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/H3JMBSQ6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.22544}
}
read the original abstract

The entanglement bootstrap program has generated new quantum numbers associated with degrees of freedom living on gapped domain walls between topological phases in two dimensions. Most fundamental among these are the so-called "parton" quantum numbers, which give rise to a zoo of composite sectors. In this note, we propose a categorical description of partons. Along the way, we make contact with ideas from generalized symmetries and SymTFT.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.22544 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. The relevant geometries for defining parton sectors. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. The pinching trick. In a series of manipulations, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. An inhomogeneous topological state with two bulk [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Every gapped domain wall between two string-net [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. We pinch the domain wall separating [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. The SymTFT embedding of Fig [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Performing the pinching trick in the SymTFT as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Snake sectors of Ref. [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. In accordance with the pinching trick Fig. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. The partition that computes the quantum di [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_11.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. The proof of ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_13.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Gauging Non-Invertible Symmetries in (2+1)d Topological Orders

    hep-th 2025-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A framework for gauging non-invertible symmetries in (2+1)d TQFTs, unifying 0-form and 1-form gauging via surface algebras, with constraints and toric-code examples.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    The latter Drinfeld center is the category of local modules over a condensable algebra, A ∈ Z(C), and it arises via gauging a corresponding 1-form symmetry in Z(C)

    Partons and 1-form symmetry gauging Let us first consider a class of examples in which the bulk TQFTs are Z(C) and Z(D) ∼= Z(C)loc A . The latter Drinfeld center is the category of local modules over a condensable algebra, A ∈ Z(C), and it arises via gauging a corresponding 1-form symmetry in Z(C). As an object in Z(C), we have A = 1 + X ℓ̸=1 ℓ , (B1) whe...

    work page

  2. [2]

    higher-gauging

    Parton quantum dimensions (and partons them- selves) are defined by pairs of topological phases separated by a domain wall rather than being intrinsic to a given topological phase. To better understand these points, let us first com- ment on the case in which we gauge a set of lines that form a Rep(G) ⊂ Z(C) fusion subcategory, where G is a finite group. ...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Amplitudes, Strings and Duality

    within Kitaev and Kong’s categorical framework of string-nets and bimodule categories. We then de- scribed our dictionary from a spacetime covariant per- spective and also made contact with recent work on SymTFTs and generalized symmetries. In a set of appendices, we describe certain extensions of the dis- cussion in the main text, consider various illust...

    work page

  4. [4]

    transparent

    Having partonic quantum dimension 1 is nec- essary but not sufficient for the corresponding surface to be invertible (or, in the entanglement bootstrap terminology, to be “transparent”)

    work page

  5. [5]

    Parton quantum dimension in entanglement bootstrap We propose the following definition of parton quan- tum dimensions, dn, for defects between different do- main wall species M and N. Given a parton state, ρn, on the N -shape region BCD , we let dn := exp ∆(B, C, D)ρn 4 , (C1) where ∆(B, C, D) := SBC + SCD − SB − SD , (C2) and S(ρX ) = −Tr(ρX log ρX ) is ...

    work page

  6. [6]

    It does not require knowing the entropy difference between the parton state, ρn, and the vacuum, ρ1, as in the original reference [3]

    This definition only needs a single quantum state. It does not require knowing the entropy difference between the parton state, ρn, and the vacuum, ρ1, as in the original reference [3]

    work page

  7. [7]

    For M ̸= N, there may not be a vacuum state (or even an Abelian state)

    This definition works when M ̸= N, and it broad- ens the scope of the original definition. For M ̸= N, there may not be a vacuum state (or even an Abelian state). Definition (C1) is equivalent to the original definition in the contexts where the original definition was proposed (i.e., when M = N). In the main text, we discused the parton quantum di- mensi...

    work page

  8. [8]

    The key formula W D→C × W D→C † = M n∈CN W D→D n , (C3) says that the possible indecomposable bimodule sum- mands are in one-to-one correspondence with the par- ton type

    F used domain walls From the viewpoint of the main text, the parton type and the domain wall type are closely related. The key formula W D→C × W D→C † = M n∈CN W D→D n , (C3) says that the possible indecomposable bimodule sum- mands are in one-to-one correspondence with the par- ton type. We explain the intuition behind this formula from the viewpoint of ...

    work page

Show all 56 references
  1. [9]

    Cer- tain formulas previously derived within the entangle- ment bootstrap are justified by our algebraic theory

    Consistency rules In this final appendix, we translate a few predic- tions of the algebraic theory of partons in the main text to the world of many-body wave functions. Cer- tain formulas previously derived within the entangle- ment bootstrap are justified by our algebraic the...

  2. [10]

    Nonabelions in the fractional quantum Hall effect,

    G. Moore and N. Read, “Nonabelions in the fractional quantum Hall effect,” Nuclear Physics B 360 (1991), no. 2-3 362–396. 1

    1991

  3. [11]

    Anyons in an exactly solved model and beyond,

    A. Kitaev, “Anyons in an exactly solved model and beyond,” Annals of Physics 321 (2006), no. 1 2–111. 1

    2006

  4. [12]

    Entanglement bootstrap approach for gapped domain walls,

    B. Shi and I. H. Kim, “Entanglement bootstrap approach for gapped domain walls,” Phys. Rev. B 103 (Mar., 2021) 115150, 2008.11793. 1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14

    2021 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Fusion rules from entanglement,

    B. Shi, K. Kato, and I. H. Kim, “Fusion rules from entanglement,” Annals of Physics 418 (2020) 168164. 1, 13

    2020

  6. [14]

    Classifying 2D topological phases: mapping ground states to string-nets,

    I. H. Kim and D. Ranard, “Classifying 2D topological phases: mapping ground states to string-nets,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.17379 (2024). 8

    2024 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Remote detectability from entanglement bootstrap I: Kirby’s torus trick,

    B. Shi, J.-L. Huang, and J. McGreevy, “Remote detectability from entanglement bootstrap I: Kirby’s torus trick,” SciPost Physics 18 (Apr., 2025) 126, 2301.07119. 1, 8, 14

    2025 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Characterizing topological order by the information convex,

    B. Shi and Y.-M. Lu, “Characterizing topological order by the information convex,” Physical Review B 99 (2019), no. 3 035112. 1

    2019

  9. [17]

    In the language of the entanglement bootstrap program these well-behaved states are called information convex states . 2

  10. [18]

    The pinching trick is named so as to distinguish it from the folding trick , a separate geometric technique for analyzing gapped domain walls. 2

  11. [19]

    Models for Gapped Boundaries and Domain Walls,

    A. Kitaev and L. Kong, “Models for Gapped Boundaries and Domain Walls,” Communications in Mathematical Physics 313 (June, 2012) 351–373, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00220-012-1500-5. 2, 3

    2012 doi

  12. [20]

    Composing topological domain walls and anyon mobility,

    P. Huston, F. Burnell, C. Jones, and D. Penneys, “Composing topological domain walls and anyon mobility,” SciPost Physics 15 (2023), no. 3 076. 2, 3, 8, 9, 10, 12

    2023

  13. [21]

    Decoherence and the transition from quantum to classical – REVISITED,

    W. H. Zurek, “Decoherence and the transition from quantum to classical – REVISITED,” arXiv e-prints (June, 2003) quant–ph/0306072, quant-ph/0306072. 2

    2003

  14. [22]

    Universal quantum computation with gapped boundaries,

    I. Cong, M. Cheng, and Z. Wang, “Universal quantum computation with gapped boundaries,” Physical Review Letters 119 (2017), no. 17 170504. 3

    2017

  15. [23]

    Qutrit Toric Code and Parafermions in Trapped Ions,

    M. Iqbal, A. Lyons, C. F. B. Lo, N. Tantivasadakarn, J. Dreiling, C. Foltz, T. M. Gatterman, D. Gresh, N. Hewitt, C. A. Holliman, et. al. , “Qutrit Toric Code and Parafermions in Trapped Ions,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.04185 (2024). 3

    2024 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Digital simulation of projective non-abelian anyons with 68 superconducting qubits,

    S. Xu, Z.-Z. Sun, K. Wang, L. Xiang, Z. Bao, Z. Zhu, F. Shen, Z. Song, P. Zhang, W. Ren, et. al. , “Digital simulation of projective non-abelian anyons with 68 superconducting qubits,” Chinese Physics Letters 40 (2023), no. 6 060301. 3

    2023

  17. [25]

    Monoidal 2-structure of bimodule categories,

    J. Greenough, “Monoidal 2-structure of bimodule categories,” Journal of Algebra 324 (2010), no. 8 1818–1859. 3, 11

    2010

  18. [26]

    We use the following chain of equivalences 16 FunC|D (M, N ) ∼ − →FunC|D (M ⊠D D, N ) ∼ − → FunD|D(D, FunC|D (M, N )) ∼ − →FunD|D(D, M∗ ⊠C N ). 3

  19. [27]

    Composing topological domain walls and anyon mobility,

    P. Huston, F. Burnell, C. Jones, and D. Penneys, “Composing topological domain walls and anyon mobility,” SciPost Physics 15 (Sept., 2023) 076, 2208.14018. 5, 14

    2023 arXiv

  20. [28]

    On the structure of the Witt group of braided fusion categories,

    A. Davydov, D. Nikshych, and V. Ostrik, “On the structure of the Witt group of braided fusion categories,” Selecta Mathematica 19 (2013), no. 1 237–269. 6, 14, 16

    2013

  21. [29]

    On braided fusion categories I,

    V. Drinfeld, S. Gelaki, D. Nikshych, and V. Ostrik, “On braided fusion categories I,” Selecta Mathematica 16 (2010) 1–119. 6

    2010

  22. [30]

    Generalized Tube Algebras, Symmetry-Resolved Partition Functions, and Twisted Boundary States,

    Y. Choi, B. C. Rayhaun, and Y. Zheng, “Generalized Tube Algebras, Symmetry-Resolved Partition Functions, and Twisted Boundary States,” 2409.02159. 7

  23. [31]

    Boundary SymTFT,

    L. Bhardwaj, C. Copetti, D. Pajer, and S. Schafer-Nameki, “Boundary SymTFT,” 2409.02166. 7

    arXiv

  24. [32]

    This counterterm rescales the surface by sχ(Σ) ∈ R and therefore affects the fusion rules and corresponding quantum dimensions

    To see one source of ambiguity, note that we can add an Euler counterterm living on the surface. This counterterm rescales the surface by sχ(Σ) ∈ R and therefore affects the fusion rules and corresponding quantum dimensions. A more general ambiguity corresponds to the fact tha...

  25. [33]

    String-net condensation: A physical mechanism for topological phases,

    M. A. Levin and X.-G. Wen, “String-net condensation: A physical mechanism for topological phases,” Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics 71 (2005), no. 4 045110. 8

    2005

  26. [34]

    Protected Edge Modes without Symmetry,

    M. Levin, “Protected Edge Modes without Symmetry,” Physical Review X 3 (Apr., 2013) 021009, 1301.7355. 8

    2013 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Higher central charges and Witt groups,

    S.-H. Ng, E. C. Rowell, Y. Wang, and Q. Zhang, “Higher central charges and Witt groups,” arXiv e-prints (Feb., 2020) arXiv:2002.03570, 2002.03570. 8

    2020 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Bicategories for boundary conditions and for surface defects in 3-d TFT,

    J. Fuchs, C. Schweigert, and A. Valentino, “Bicategories for boundary conditions and for surface defects in 3-d TFT,” Communications in Mathematical Physics 321 (2013) 543–575. 8, 14

    2013

  29. [37]

    Braided fusion categories, gravitational anomalies, and the mathematical framework for topological orders in any dimensions,

    L. Kong and X.-G. Wen, “Braided fusion categories, gravitational anomalies, and the mathematical framework for topological orders in any dimensions,” arXiv e-prints (May, 2014) arXiv:1405.5858, 1405.5858. 8

    2014 arXiv

  30. [38]

    On the Classification of Topological Orders,

    T. Johnson-Freyd, “On the Classification of Topological Orders,” Communications in Mathematical Physics 393 (July, 2022) 989–1033, 2003.06663

    2022 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Higher condensation theory,

    L. Kong, Z.-H. Zhang, J. Zhao, and H. Zheng, “Higher condensation theory,” arXiv e-prints (Mar.,

  32. [40]

    On generalized symmetries and structure of modular categories,

    S. X. Cui, M. S. Zini, and Z. Wang, “On generalized symmetries and structure of modular categories,” Science China Mathematics 62 (2019) 417–446. 11

    2019

  33. [41]

    An invitation to topological orders and category theory,

    L. Kong and Z.-H. Zhang, “An invitation to topological orders and category theory,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.05565 (2022). 8

    2022 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Lectures on entanglement in quantum field theory,

    H. Casini and M. Huerta, “Lectures on entanglement in quantum field theory,” PoS T ASI2021(2023) 002, 2201.13310. 9

    2023 arXiv

  35. [43]

    In particular, we say a topological order, P, is Witt non-trivial if its corresponding Witt class is non-trivial (i.e., P is not a Drinfeld center)

    More mathematically, we use the notion of Witt equivalence introduced in [19, 46]. In particular, we say a topological order, P, is Witt non-trivial if its corresponding Witt class is non-trivial (i.e., P is not a Drinfeld center). 9

  36. [44]

    Strict Area Law Entanglement versus Chirality,

    X. Li, T.-C. Lin, J. McGreevy, and B. Shi, “Strict Area Law Entanglement versus Chirality,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 134 (May, 2025) 180402, 2408.10306. 9

    2025

  37. [45]

    On dualizability of braided tensor categories,

    A. Brochier, D. Jordan, and N. Snyder, “On dualizability of braided tensor categories,” Compositio Mathematica 157 (Mar., 2021) 435–483, http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/S0010437X20007630. 9, 10

    2021 doi

  38. [46]

    M. K. N. Balasubramanian, M. Buican, C. Delcamp, and R. Radhakrishnan To appear. 10, 11

  39. [47]

    Symmetry Fractionalization, Defects, and Gauging of Topological Phases,

    M. Barkeshli, P. Bonderson, M. Cheng, and Z. Wang, “Symmetry Fractionalization, Defects, and Gauging of Topological Phases,” Phys. Rev. B 100 (2019), no. 11 115147, 1410.4540. 10, 11

    2019 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Invertibility of Condensation Defects and Symmetries of 2 + 1d QFTs,

    M. Buican and R. Radhakrishnan, “Invertibility of Condensation Defects and Symmetries of 2 + 1d QFTs,” Commun. Math. Phys. 405 (2024), no. 9 217, 2309.15181. 11

    2024 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Higher Gauging and Non-invertible Condensation Defects,

    K. Roumpedakis, S. Seifnashri, and S.-H. Shao, “Higher Gauging and Non-invertible Condensation Defects,” Communications in Mathematical Physics 401 (Aug., 2023) 3043–3107, 2204.02407. 11, 16

    2023 arXiv

  42. [51]

    In particular, we have θℓ = exp πiℓ(ℓ + 1) 2k + 1 , θ ˜ℓ = exp − πi ˜ℓ(˜ℓ + 1) 2k + 1

    The topological spins for the two factors are complex conjugates of each other. In particular, we have θℓ = exp πiℓ(ℓ + 1) 2k + 1 , θ ˜ℓ = exp − πi ˜ℓ(˜ℓ + 1) 2k + 1 . (C9) Note that the SU (2) spin 2 k anyon is a boson. 11

  43. [52]

    Immersed figure-8 Annuli and Anyons,

    B. Shi, “Immersed figure-8 Annuli and Anyons,” Annales Henri Poincar´ e(Dec., 2024) 2309.17155. 13

    2024 arXiv

  44. [53]

    Such a state will violate axiom A0 of the entanglement bootstrap on the wall, (i.e., δ0 > 0 for Fig

    It is also possible to have a many-body state corresponding to a superposition of multiple parton species. Such a state will violate axiom A0 of the entanglement bootstrap on the wall, (i.e., δ0 > 0 for Fig. 10). It will not correspond to an indecomposable bimodule. 13

  45. [54]

    Correspondences of ribbon categories,

    J. Frohlich, J. Fuchs, I. Runkel, and C. Schweigert, “Correspondences of ribbon categories,” Adv. Math. 199 (2006) 192–329, math/0309465. 14

    2006 arXiv

  46. [55]

    Higher central charges and topological boundaries in 2+1-dimensional TQFTs,

    J. Kaidi, Z. Komargodski, K. Ohmori, S. Seifnashri, and S.-H. Shao, “Higher central charges and topological boundaries in 2+1-dimensional TQFTs,” SciPost Phys. 13 (2022), no. 3 067, 2107.13091. 15

    2022 arXiv

  47. [56]

    The Witt group of non-degenerate braided fusion categories,

    A. Davydov, M. M¨ uger, D. Nikshych, and V. Ostrik, “The Witt group of non-degenerate braided fusion categories,” Journal f¨ ur die reine und angewandte Mathematik (Crelles Journal) 2013 (2013), no. 677 135–177. 16

    2013

  48. [2024]

    arXiv:2403.07813, 2403.07813

Pith tools

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