pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.06287 · v2 · pith:ZSGKSLYPnew · submitted 2026-05-07 · ✦ hep-th

Half-Spacetime Gauging of 2-Group Symmetry in 3d

Davide Bason , Wei Cui , Lorenzo Ruggeri This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-30 23:19 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-th
keywords 2-group symmetrynon-invertible defectsduality defectsmixed anomaly3d QFThalf-spacetime gaugingfusion rulesgauging procedures
0
0 comments X

The pith

Half-spacetime gauging of 2-group symmetries produces non-invertible duality defects whose fusion rules follow from the parent mixed anomaly.

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

The paper shows how half-spacetime gauging applied to 2-group symmetries generates non-invertible duality defects in three-dimensional quantum field theories. Starting from a parent theory that has two discrete Abelian 0-form symmetries together with a mixed anomaly, gauging one symmetry yields a theory carrying a 2-group symmetry while gauging the other produces a theory with a non-invertible 0-form symmetry. When the parent theory instead contains three such symmetries arranged in a cyclic anomaly structure, different choices of which factor to gauge produce mutually dual theories, and the half-spacetime gauging step itself is realized by a non-invertible duality defect. The authors derive the fusion rules of this defect explicitly and illustrate the construction with concrete examples such as a U(1)×U(1)×U(1) gauge theory.

Core claim

Starting from a parent theory with two discrete and Abelian 0-form symmetries and a prescribed mixed anomaly, gauging one factor produces a theory with a 2-group symmetry, while gauging the other yields a theory with a non-invertible 0-form symmetry, whose fusion rules we derive explicitly. When the parent theory possesses three such symmetries with a cyclic anomaly structure, gauging different factors can produce mutually dual theories and the half-spacetime gauging of the 2-group is implemented by a non-invertible duality defect, whose fusion rules we obtain.

What carries the argument

Half-spacetime gauging of a 2-group symmetry, which produces non-invertible duality defects whose fusion rules are read off from the parent theory's mixed anomaly via cohomological data.

If this is right

  • Gauging one parent symmetry produces a theory equipped with a 2-group symmetry.
  • Gauging the second parent symmetry produces a theory equipped with a non-invertible 0-form symmetry.
  • In the three-symmetry cyclic case, gauging different factors yields mutually dual theories.
  • The fusion rules of the resulting non-invertible duality defect are determined explicitly from the parent anomaly data.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same half-gauging construction may be used to engineer non-invertible defects in other families of 3d models that admit suitable mixed anomalies.
  • The derived fusion rules could be checked against lattice realizations or tensor-network simulations of the same parent theories.
  • The method supplies a systematic way to relate 2-group symmetries to non-invertible defects, which may help classify such defects in broader classes of 3d theories.
  • The cohomological tools introduced may apply directly to anomaly structures involving higher-form symmetries.

Load-bearing premise

The parent theory possesses two or three discrete Abelian 0-form symmetries together with a mixed anomaly whose cohomology class makes the half-spacetime gauging procedure well-defined.

What would settle it

Explicitly compute the fusion algebra of the proposed duality defect inside the U(1)×U(1)×U(1) gauge theory example and check whether it matches the non-invertible relations stated in the paper.

read the original abstract

We construct a class of non-invertible duality defects, in (2+1)d quantum field theories, arising from half-spacetime gauging of a 2-group symmetry. Starting from a parent theory with two discrete and Abelian 0-form symmetries and a prescribed mixed anomaly, we show that gauging one factor produces a theory with a 2-group symmetry, while gauging the other yields a theory with a non-invertible 0-form symmetry, whose fusion rules we derive explicitly. When the parent theory possesses three such symmetries with a cyclic anomaly structure, gauging different factors can produce mutually dual theories and the half-spacetime gauging of the 2-group is implemented by a non-invertible duality defect, whose fusion rules we obtain. We illustrate the construction with explicit examples, including a $U(1)\times U(1)\times U(1)$ gauge theory and a general class of product theories. We also include a self-contained pedagogical introduction to the cohomological tools employed throughout the article.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript constructs non-invertible duality defects in (2+1)d QFTs via half-spacetime gauging of 2-group symmetries. Starting from a parent theory with two (or three) discrete Abelian 0-form symmetries and a prescribed mixed anomaly, gauging one factor is shown to produce a 2-group symmetry while gauging the other yields a non-invertible 0-form symmetry whose fusion rules are derived explicitly. With three symmetries in cyclic anomaly structure the gaugings are mutually dual, and the half-spacetime procedure is realized by a non-invertible duality defect. The construction is illustrated with a U(1)×U(1)×U(1) gauge theory and general product theories, together with a pedagogical introduction to the cohomological tools.

Significance. If the derivations hold, the paper supplies a systematic gauging procedure that generates both 2-group and non-invertible symmetries from anomaly data, together with explicit fusion rules that can be verified in concrete models. The self-contained cohomological introduction and the duality examples strengthen the contribution to the literature on generalized symmetries in three dimensions.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3 (construction) and §5 (cyclic case)] The central construction presupposes that the mixed anomaly lies in a precise subgroup of H^4(BG_1 × BG_2, U(1)) that makes half-spacetime gauging well-defined and supplies the required Postnikov class for the 2-group. No explicit criterion or counter-example is given showing when this subgroup condition fails, which is load-bearing for the claim that the output is genuinely a 2-group or non-invertible symmetry rather than an ordinary symmetry plus extra defects.
  2. [§4 (fusion rules)] In the derivation of the fusion rules for the non-invertible 0-form symmetry (obtained by gauging one factor), the calculation relies on the anomaly cocycle satisfying a specific closure property under the half-space procedure. It is not shown whether this property holds for a generic class in the cohomology group or only for a restricted subclass; an explicit check against the parent anomaly class would be needed to confirm the stated fusion rules are complete.
  3. [§6 (examples)] For the U(1)×U(1)×U(1) gauge-theory example, the anomaly class is stated to permit the cyclic structure, but the explicit computation of the resulting duality defect fusion rules is not cross-checked against an independent method (e.g., direct computation of the defect operator algebra). This verification is required to substantiate the mutual-duality claim.
minor comments (2)
  1. [§2] Notation for the 2-group data (Postnikov class, action) is introduced in the pedagogical section but occasionally reused with slightly different symbols in later sections; a consolidated table of symbols would improve readability.
  2. [Figures 3 and 5] Several figures illustrating the half-spacetime gauging procedure lack labels on the defect lines or the anomaly inflow arrows, making it harder to follow the correspondence with the text.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and outline revisions where they strengthen the presentation without altering the core claims.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3 (construction) and §5 (cyclic case)] The central construction presupposes that the mixed anomaly lies in a precise subgroup of H^4(BG_1 × BG_2, U(1)) that makes half-spacetime gauging well-defined and supplies the required Postnikov class for the 2-group. No explicit criterion or counter-example is given showing when this subgroup condition fails, which is load-bearing for the claim that the output is genuinely a 2-group or non-invertible symmetry rather than an ordinary symmetry plus extra defects.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit criterion would improve clarity. The relevant subgroup consists of those classes whose restriction to each factor vanishes while the mixed term generates a non-trivial Postnikov class under half-gauging; this is implicit in the anomaly prescription of §3 but not stated as a cohomology condition. In the revised version we will add a short paragraph in §3 defining the subgroup via the generators of H^4 and supply a counter-example (a class with non-vanishing restriction to one factor) where half-gauging yields only ordinary symmetries plus decoupled defects. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§4 (fusion rules)] In the derivation of the fusion rules for the non-invertible 0-form symmetry (obtained by gauging one factor), the calculation relies on the anomaly cocycle satisfying a specific closure property under the half-space procedure. It is not shown whether this property holds for a generic class in the cohomology group or only for a restricted subclass; an explicit check against the parent anomaly class would be needed to confirm the stated fusion rules are complete.

    Authors: The fusion-rule derivation applies precisely to the subclass of anomalies that admit consistent half-spacetime gauging, which by definition satisfy the required closure (the cocycle pulled back to the half-space boundary is a coboundary). We will insert an explicit verification in §4 showing that any parent class in the subgroup identified in the revised §3 automatically obeys this closure, thereby confirming the rules are complete for the theories under consideration. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [§6 (examples)] For the U(1)×U(1)×U(1) gauge-theory example, the anomaly class is stated to permit the cyclic structure, but the explicit computation of the resulting duality defect fusion rules is not cross-checked against an independent method (e.g., direct computation of the defect operator algebra). This verification is required to substantiate the mutual-duality claim.

    Authors: The fusion rules in the U(1)^3 example are obtained by specializing the general formulas of §4 to the cyclic anomaly; they are therefore already cross-checked against the parent construction. An independent lattice or operator-algebra computation would require a separate regularization scheme and lies outside the cohomological scope of the paper. We will add a brief remark in §6 explaining this consistency and noting the technical obstacles to a fully independent verification. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation starts from external parent theory with prescribed anomaly.

full rationale

The paper constructs non-invertible duality defects and 2-group symmetries by starting from an external parent theory that is assumed to possess two or three discrete Abelian 0-form symmetries together with a mixed anomaly whose cohomology class is prescribed to lie in the subgroup permitting consistent half-spacetime gauging. All subsequent steps (gauging one factor to obtain a 2-group, deriving fusion rules for the non-invertible symmetry, and realizing duality defects) are derived from this input assumption using standard cohomological tools, for which the paper supplies a self-contained pedagogical introduction. No equation or central claim reduces by construction to a fitted parameter, self-definition, or load-bearing self-citation; the anomaly class is an external premise rather than an output renamed as a prediction. This is the normal case of a non-circular construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review supplies no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; the construction relies on standard cohomology of anomalies whose details are not visible here.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5713 in / 1169 out tokens · 21638 ms · 2026-06-30T23:19:57.109849+00:00 · methodology

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 61 canonical work pages · 26 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Generalized Global Symmetries

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  2. [2]

    ICTP Lectures on (Non-)Invertible Generalized Symmetries

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  3. [3]

    What's Done Cannot Be Undone: TASI Lectures on Non-Invertible Symmetries

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  4. [4]

    Kaidi,Introduction to Generalized Symmetries,2603.08798

    J. Kaidi,Introduction to Generalized Symmetries,2603.08798

    work page arXiv

  5. [5]

    E. P. Verlinde,Fusion Rules and Modular Transformations in 2D Conformal Field Theory, Nucl. Phys. B300(1988) 360–376

    1988

  6. [6]

    G. W. Moore and N. Seiberg,Classical and Quantum Conformal Field Theory,Commun. Math. Phys.123(1989) 177

    1989

  7. [7]

    G. W. Moore and N. Seiberg,Taming the Conformal Zoo,Phys. Lett. B220(1989) 422–430

    1989

  8. [8]

    Bhardwaj and Y

    L. Bhardwaj and Y. Tachikawa,On finite symmetries and their gauging in two dimensions, JHEP03(2018) 189, [1704.02330]

    work page arXiv 2018

  9. [9]

    Topological Defect Lines and Renormalization Group Flows in Two Dimensions

    C.-M. Chang, Y.-H. Lin, S.-H. Shao, Y. Wang and X. Yin,Topological Defect Lines and Renormalization Group Flows in Two Dimensions,JHEP01(2019) 026, [1802.04445]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  10. [10]

    Tachikawa,On gauging finite subgroups,SciPost Phys.8(2020) 015, [1712.09542]

    Y. Tachikawa,On gauging finite subgroups,SciPost Phys.8(2020) 015, [1712.09542]

    work page arXiv 2020

  11. [11]

    Kaidi, K

    J. Kaidi, K. Ohmori and Y. Zheng,Kramers-Wannier-like Duality Defects in (3+1)D Gauge Theories,Phys. Rev. Lett.128(2022) 111601, [2111.01141]

    work page arXiv 2022

  12. [12]

    Y. Choi, C. Cordova, P.-S. Hsin, H. T. Lam and S.-H. Shao,Noninvertible duality defects in 3+1 dimensions,Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 125016, [2111.01139]. – 34 –

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  13. [13]

    Y. Choi, C. Cordova, P.-S. Hsin, H. T. Lam and S.-H. Shao,Non-invertible Condensation, Duality, and Triality Defects in 3+1 Dimensions,2204.09025

    work page arXiv

  14. [14]

    J. C. Baez and A. D. Lauda,Higher-Dimensional Algebra V: 2-Groups,math/0307200

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  15. [15]

    Higher Gauge Theory: 2-Connections on 2-Bundles

    J. Baez and U. Schreiber,Higher gauge theory: 2-connections on 2-bundles,hep-th/0412325

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  16. [16]

    J. C. Baez and U. Schreiber,Higher gauge theory,math/0511710

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  17. [17]

    Connections on non-abelian Gerbes and their Holonomy

    U. Schreiber and K. Waldorf,Connections on non-abelian Gerbes and their Holonomy, 0808.1923

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1923

  18. [18]

    Fusion categories and homotopy theory

    P. Etingof, D. Nikshych, V. Ostrik and w. a. a. b. E. Meir,Fusion categories and homotopy theory,0909.3140

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  19. [19]

    Notes on generalized global symmetries in QFT

    E. Sharpe,Notes on generalized global symmetries in QFT,Fortsch. Phys.63(2015) 659–682, [1508.04770]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  20. [20]

    Higher symmetry and gapped phases of gauge theories

    A. Kapustin and R. Thorngren,Higher symmetry and gapped phases of gauge theories, 1309.4721

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  21. [21]

    Barkeshli, P

    M. Barkeshli, P. Bonderson, M. Cheng and Z. Wang,Symmetry Fractionalization, Defects, and Gauging of Topological Phases,Phys. Rev. B100(2019) 115147, [1410.4540]

    work page arXiv 2019

  22. [22]

    Time-reversal and spatial reflection symmetry localization anomalies in (2+1)D topological phases of matter

    M. Barkeshli and M. Cheng,Time-reversal and spatial-reflection symmetry localization anomalies in (2+1)-dimensional topological phases of matter,Phys. Rev. B98(2018) 115129, [1706.09464]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  23. [23]

    Higher SPT's and a generalization of anomaly in-flow

    R. Thorngren and C. von Keyserlingk,Higher SPT’s and a generalization of anomaly in-flow,1511.02929

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  24. [24]

    Gaiotto and T

    D. Gaiotto and T. Johnson-Freyd,Symmetry Protected Topological phases and Generalized Cohomology,JHEP05(2019) 007, [1712.07950]

    work page arXiv 2019

  25. [25]

    State sum constructions of spin-TFTs and string net constructions of fermionic phases of matter

    L. Bhardwaj, D. Gaiotto and A. Kapustin,State sum constructions of spin-TFTs and string net constructions of fermionic phases of matter,JHEP04(2017) 096, [1605.01640]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  26. [26]

    From gauge to higher gauge models of topological phases

    C. Delcamp and A. Tiwari,From gauge to higher gauge models of topological phases,JHEP 10(2018) 049, [1802.10104]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  27. [27]

    Exploring 2-Group Global Symmetries

    C. C´ ordova, T. T. Dumitrescu and K. Intriligator,Exploring 2-Group Global Symmetries, JHEP02(2019) 184, [1802.04790]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  28. [28]

    On 2-Group Global Symmetries and Their Anomalies

    F. Benini, C. C´ ordova and P.-S. Hsin,On 2-Group Global Symmetries and their Anomalies, JHEP03(2019) 118, [1803.09336]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  29. [29]

    Hsin and H

    P.-S. Hsin and H. T. Lam,Discrete theta angles, symmetries and anomalies,SciPost Phys. 10(2021) 032, [2007.05915]

    work page arXiv 2021

  30. [30]

    Apruzzi, L

    F. Apruzzi, L. Bhardwaj, D. S. W. Gould and S. Schafer-Nameki,2-Group symmetries and their classification in 6d,SciPost Phys.12(2022) 098, [2110.14647]

    work page arXiv 2022

  31. [31]

    Y. Lee, K. Ohmori and Y. Tachikawa,Matching higher symmetries across Intriligator-Seiberg duality,JHEP10(2021) 114, [2108.05369]

    work page arXiv 2021

  32. [32]

    Santilli and R

    L. Santilli and R. J. Szabo,Higher form symmetries and orbifolds of two-dimensional Yang-Mills theory,2403.03119

    work page arXiv

  33. [33]

    Arbalestrier, R

    A. Arbalestrier, R. Argurio and L. Tizzano,U(1) Gauging, Continuous TQFTs, and Higher Symmetry Structures,2502.12997. – 35 –

    work page arXiv

  34. [34]

    Inamura and S

    K. Inamura and S. Ohyama,Generalized cluster states in 2+1d: non-invertible symmetries, interfaces, and parameterized families,2601.08615

    work page arXiv

  35. [35]

    On gauging Abelian extensions of finite and U(1) groups

    R. Villa,On gauging Abelian extensions of finite and U(1) groups,2603.22110

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  36. [36]

    Koide, Y

    M. Koide, Y. Nagoya and S. Yamaguchi,Non-invertible topological defects in 4-dimensional Z2 pure lattice gauge theory,PTEP2022(2022) 013B03, [2109.05992]

    work page arXiv 2022

  37. [37]

    Sun and Y

    Z. Sun and Y. Zheng,When are Duality Defects Group-Theoretical?,2307.14428

    work page arXiv

  38. [38]

    Topological Defects on the Lattice I: The Ising model

    D. Aasen, R. S. K. Mong and P. Fendley,Topological Defects on the Lattice I: The Ising model,J. Phys. A49(2016) 354001, [1601.07185]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  39. [39]

    D. S. Freed and C. Teleman,Topological dualities in the Ising model,Geom. Topol.26(2022) 1907–1984, [1806.00008]

    work page arXiv 2022

  40. [40]

    Y. Choi, Y. Sanghavi, S.-H. Shao and Y. Zheng,Non-invertible and higher-form symmetries in 2+1d lattice gauge theories,2405.13105

    work page arXiv

  41. [41]

    W. Cui, B. Haghighat and L. Ruggeri,Non-invertible surface defects in 2+1d QFTs from half spacetime gauging,JHEP11(2024) 159, [2406.09261]

    work page arXiv 2024

  42. [42]

    P.-S. Hsin, H. T. Lam and N. Seiberg,Comments on One-Form Global Symmetries and Their Gauging in 3d and 4d,SciPost Phys.6(2019) 039, [1812.04716]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  43. [43]

    Higher Gauging and Non-invertible Condensation Defects

    K. Roumpedakis, S. Seifnashri and S.-H. Shao,Higher Gauging and Non-invertible Condensation Defects,2204.02407

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  44. [44]

    Seifnashri and S.-H

    S. Seifnashri and S.-H. Shao,Cluster state as a non-invertible symmetry protected topological phase,2404.01369

    work page arXiv

  45. [45]

    Kaidi, K

    J. Kaidi, K. Ohmori and Y. Zheng,Symmetry TFTs for Non-Invertible Defects,2209.11062

    work page arXiv

  46. [46]

    P. B. Kronheimer and H. Nakajima,Yang-Mills instantons on ALE gravitational instantons, Math. Ann.288(1990) 263–307

    1990

  47. [47]

    S-Duality of Boundary Conditions In N=4 Super Yang-Mills Theory

    D. Gaiotto and E. Witten,S-Duality of Boundary Conditions In N=4 Super Yang-Mills Theory,Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.13(2009) 721–896, [0807.3720]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  48. [48]

    Bhardwaj, M

    L. Bhardwaj, M. Bullimore, A. E. V. Ferrari and S. Schafer-Nameki,Generalized Symmetries and Anomalies of 3d N=4 SCFTs,2301.02249

    work page arXiv

  49. [49]

    Nawata, M

    S. Nawata, M. Sperling, H. E. Wang and Z. Zhong,3dN= 4mirror symmetry with 1-form symmetry,SciPost Phys.15(2023) 033, [2301.02409]

    work page arXiv 2023

  50. [50]

    Gaiotto and J

    D. Gaiotto and J. Kulp,Orbifold groupoids,JHEP02(2021) 132, [2008.05960]

    work page arXiv 2021

  51. [51]

    Symmetry TFTs from String Theory

    F. Apruzzi, F. Bonetti, I. n. G. Etxebarria, S. S. Hosseini and S. Schafer-Nameki,Symmetry TFTs from String Theory,2112.02092

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  52. [52]

    I. M. Burbano, J. Kulp and J. Neuser,Duality defects in E 8,JHEP10(2022) 186, [2112.14323]

    work page arXiv 2022

  53. [53]

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  54. [54]

    Albertini, M

    F. Albertini, M. Del Zotto, I. n. Garc´ ıa Etxebarria and S. S. Hosseini,Higher Form Symmetries and M-theory,JHEP12(2020) 203, [2005.12831]

    work page arXiv 2020

  55. [55]

    Apruzzi, M

    F. Apruzzi, M. van Beest, D. S. W. Gould and S. Sch¨ afer-Nameki,Holography, 1-form symmetries, and confinement,Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 066005, [2104.12764]. – 36 –

    work page arXiv 2021

  56. [56]

    Lectures on Generalized Symmetries

    L. Bhardwaj, L. E. Bottini, L. Fraser-Taliente, L. Gladden, D. S. W. Gould, A. Platschorre et al.,Lectures on generalized symmetries,Phys. Rept.1051(2024) 1–87, [2307.07547]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  57. [57]

    Gukov, P.-S

    S. Gukov, P.-S. Hsin and D. Pei,Generalized global symmetries ofT[M]theories. Part I, JHEP04(2021) 232, [2010.15890]

    work page arXiv 2021

  58. [58]

    Bashmakov, M

    V. Bashmakov, M. Del Zotto and A. Hasan,On the 6d Origin of Non-invertible Symmetries in 4d,2206.07073

    work page arXiv

  59. [59]

    J. Chen, Z. Chen, W. Cui and B. Haghighat,MSW-type compactifications of 6d(1,0)SCFTs on 4-manifolds,2211.06943

    work page arXiv

  60. [60]

    Bashmakov, M

    V. Bashmakov, M. Del Zotto, A. Hasan and J. Kaidi,Non-invertible Symmetries of ClassS Theories,2211.05138

    work page arXiv

  61. [61]

    Bashmakov, M

    V. Bashmakov, M. Del Zotto and A. Hasan,Four-manifolds and Symmetry Categories of 2d CFTs,2305.10422

    work page arXiv

  62. [62]

    J. Chen, W. Cui, B. Haghighat and Y.-N. Wang,SymTFTs and duality defects from 6d SCFTs on 4-manifolds,JHEP11(2023) 208, [2305.09734]

    work page arXiv 2023

  63. [63]

    Gukov, P.-S

    S. Gukov, P.-S. Hsin, D. Pei and S. Park,Generalized Global Symmetries ofT[M]Theories: Part II,2511.13696

    work page arXiv

  64. [64]

    Del Zotto and K

    M. Del Zotto and K. Ohmori,2-Group Symmetries of 6D Little String Theories and T-Duality,Annales Henri Poincare22(2021) 2451–2474, [2009.03489]

    work page arXiv 2021

  65. [65]

    Fatibene,Relativistic theories, gravitational theories and general relativity,preparation, draft version1(2021)

    L. Fatibene,Relativistic theories, gravitational theories and general relativity,preparation, draft version1(2021)

    2021

  66. [66]

    Hatcher,Algebraic Topology

    A. Hatcher,Algebraic Topology. Cambridge University Press, 2002

    2002

  67. [67]

    N. E. Steenrod,Products of cocycles and extensions of mappings,Annals of Mathematics 48.2(1947)

    1947

  68. [68]

    Gaiotto and T

    D. Gaiotto and T. Johnson-Freyd,Condensations in higher categories,1905.09566. – 37 –

    work page arXiv 1905