Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

In one spatial dimension below ordinary braiding, a 4N-step operator word defines a quantized mutual-statistics phase for Z_N-fusing excitations.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 08:58 UTC pith:SE6WGEH4

load-bearing objection Genuinely new W_N word with Bockstein response and solid lattice checks; the universality claim needs a caveat about one-dimensional sectors, but this is refereeable. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.02280 v3 pith:SE6WGEH4 submitted 2026-07-02 quant-ph cond-mat.str-elhep-thmath-phmath.MPmath.QA

Bockstein braiding statistics

Po-Shen Hsin , Yu-An Chen This is my paper
classification quant-ph cond-mat.str-elhep-thmath-phmath.MPmath.QA
keywords Bockstein braidingmutual statisticsZ_N fusiongeneralized symmetriesmixed anomalieshigher-form symmetrieslattice modelsBerry phase
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper introduces a universal statistical process for Z_N-fusing excitations in spatial dimension d = p + q + 1, one dimension below the usual setting for mutual braiding. The process is the staggered word W_N(X, Y) = (Y^{-1} X^{-1})^N (Y X)^N built from local excitation operators; it is closed by the Z_N fusion rule and accumulates a Berry phase that is quantized as exp(2\pi i k / N). The paper shows this phase equals the response of the Bockstein inflow action (2\pi i k/N) \int A \cup \beta_N B, so it is a genuine mutual-statistics invariant. If correct, the construction gives a microscopic, dimension-independent diagnostic of mixed anomalies and obstructs fully symmetric gapped phases.

Core claim

In d = p + q + 1, Z_N-fusing p- and q-dimensional excitations have a well-defined mutual statistic W_N(X, Y) = (Y^{-1} X^{-1})^N (Y X)^N. Starting from vacuum, both alternating histories close because of Z_N fusion; the relative Berry phase survives local redefinitions, is quantized as exp(2\pi i k / N), is bilinear in fusion labels, and equals the field-theory anomaly inflow (2\pi i k/N) \int A \cup \beta_N B. Interpreted via open symmetry operators, the same word diagnoses mixed anomalies, with explicit (1+1)D spin-chain, (2+1)D and (3+1)D lattice models, and continuum (3+1)D gauge-theory realizations.

What carries the argument

The central object is the 4N-step operator word W_N(X, Y) = (Y^{-1} X^{-1})^N (Y X)^N, with X and Y local creation or hopping operators whose supports in d = p + q + 1 intersect along a line in a staggered geometry. The N-fold repetition compares two alternating histories that are closed by Z_N fusion; the surviving phase measures the linking of one excitation with the N-fold fusion junction of the other, encoded by the Bockstein homomorphism \beta_N associated to the short exact sequence 0 \to Z_N \to Z_{N^2} \to Z_N \to 0. The argument relies on cancellation of local phases in one-dimensional fixed-configuration sectors and on locality identities that make the phase independent of local re

Load-bearing premise

The proof that W_N is a well-defined scalar phase assumes every fixed-configuration sector of the local excitations is one-dimensional (Abelian fusion), so that local phase factors cancel; degenerate or non-Abelian fusion spaces would break the argument.

What would settle it

Construct a lattice model with a Z_N-fusing excitation whose fixed-configuration sector is two-dimensional and compute W_N in two different bases within that sector: if the phase is not a c-number or depends on the basis, the invariant is not well-defined. Equivalently, numerically evaluate W_2 on a (1+1)D spin chain with the staggered interval ordering reversed; the claimed -1 phase should be independent of interval lengths and boundary decorations.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • For any N and any excitation dimensions p, q with Z_N fusion, Bockstein braiding is a well-defined, quantized mutual-statistics invariant in d = p + q + 1.
  • A nontrivial Bockstein phase forbids a fully symmetric gapped phase, so the system must be gapless or break one of the two symmetries.
  • The invariant obstructs simultaneous condensation of the two excitations and implies fractionalization of higher-form symmetries in the broken phase.
  • Applied to open symmetry operators, W_N becomes a microscopic diagnostic of mixed anomalies, as demonstrated in a (1+1)D spin chain for the spin-flip and controlled-Z symmetries.
  • Explicit (2+1)D and (3+1)D lattice models and (3+1)D gauge theories realize the invariant with k = 1.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the one-dimensional-sector assumption fails, for example for non-Abelian or degenerate fusion spaces, W_N may fail to be a c-number; probing that regime would clarify the boundary of the construction's universality.
  • Because W_N is a finite, roughly 4N-term local unitary word, it could serve as a numerically accessible probe of symmetry-enforced gaplessness in finite-size or tensor-network simulations.
  • The staggered-alternating structure suggests generalizations beyond the N-fold junction case, such as Z_N and Z_M excitations with mixed Bockstein responses, which the paper does not treat.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a statistical process W_N(X,Y) = (Y^{-1}X^{-1})^N(YX)^N for Z_N-fusing excitations in spatial dimension d=p+q+1, one less than the dimension required for ordinary mutual braiding. The central claims are that W_N is a closed, locally robust statistical process whose Berry phase is quantized as exp(2πik/N), is bilinear in the fusion labels, and has field-theory response given by the Bockstein inflow action (2πik/N)∫ A∪β_N B. The authors present a (1+1)D spin-chain realization diagnosing the mixed anomaly between ∏X and ∏CZ, explicit (2+1)D and (3+1)D lattice patch constructions, a condensed Z_{N^2} toric-code realization for arbitrary N, and applications to Abelian and non-Abelian continuum gauge theories. They further prove that a nontrivial Bockstein phase obstructs a fully symmetric gapped phase and implies symmetry fractionalization.

Significance. If the construction is correct, it provides a uniform and remarkably simple microscopic invariant for mutual statistics in the previously awkward dimension d=p+q+1, and it connects that invariant directly to the Bockstein homomorphism and to mixed generalized-symmetry anomalies. The paper's strengths include explicit, self-contained lattice evaluations (spin-chain W_2=-1, toric-code W_N=exp(2πi/N), and the (2+1)D and (3+1)D patch words), parameter-free derivations, and a detailed proof of bilinearity in Appendix C. The proposal is significant for the field and likely to be useful as a diagnostic tool for lattice models and gauge theories, provided the Abelian scope is stated precisely.

major comments (2)
  1. [Appendix A, near Eq. (15); Abstract and §2] The scalar-phase property of W_N is proven only under the explicit assumption that each fixed-configuration sector is one-dimensional ('we restrict to Abelian defects for which each fixed-configuration sector is one-dimensional'). The abstract and main text nevertheless state the construction applies to 'excitations obeying Z_N fusion for arbitrary N and all excitation dimensions p and q' without this Abelian qualifier. If a Z_N-fusing defect has degenerate or non-Abelian fusion spaces, φ_v in Eq. (15) is an operator, the two staircases in Eqs. (16)–(22) need not cancel, and W_N need not be a scalar phase; consequently the quantization W_N^N=1 in Eq. (8) is not established. Please either restrict the theorem/abstract to Abelian defects with one-dimensional fixed-configuration sectors, or provide a proof covering degenerate sectors. The explicit lattice examples in Appendices D–G are all
  2. [§3.1, Theorem 1 and footnote 3] The no-gapped-phase theorem relies on the remote-detectability/condensation-completion property for arbitrary r, with a separate citation for r≤1. Since this property is load-bearing for the advertised consequence that a nontrivial Bockstein phase rules out a fully symmetric gapped phase, the manuscript should state precisely the theorem being invoked and verify its hypotheses: why the absence of genuine charged operators implies D_A is a condensation defect, and why the twisted-sector junction J_B can be used in the linked correlator in the same way as a genuine operator. As written, the proof is a sketch that depends on a standard but nontrivial result without a precise statement or derivation.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§2.2, Eq. (8)] The quantization argument is very terse ('Translate W_N horizontally...'). Consider adding an explicit algebraic demonstration that the product of the N translated words is the identity, in the spirit of Appendix C, to make the proof self-contained.
  2. [Eqs. (3) and (5)] The two forms W_N=(Y^{-1}X^{-1})^N(YX)^N and W_N=((XY)^N)^{-1}(YX)^N are used interchangeably. It would help to state explicitly that they are equal by inversion of (XY)^N.
  3. [Appendices F.5 and G.2] The symbol 𝔴^GT_1 is used both for a specific chain and for its homology class PD(w_1). Please distinguish the chain coefficient from the homology class to avoid confusion on nonorientable surfaces, where the chain need not be a boundary.
  4. [§2, first paragraph] The phrase 'selected N-fold fusion junction' is central but is defined only pictorially. A short formal definition (e.g., as the junction at the end of the vertical segment in Fig. 2, or via β_N B) would improve precision.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: W_N is evaluated microscopically with no fitted inputs; self-citations to prior statistical-process and anomaly frameworks are not load-bearing. Main caveat is a scope limitation (Abelian one-dimensional sectors), not circularity.

full rationale

The central derivation is not circular. W_N is defined as an explicit 4N-step word (Eq. (3)/(5)) and its phase is computed directly in the lattice realizations: W_2(U^A_e,U^B_f)=-1 in Eq. (108) for the condensed Z_4 toric code, and W_2(X_I,Y_J)=-1 in Eqs. (147), (195), (274) for the (1+1)D, (2+1)D and (3+1)D patch constructions. No parameter is fitted to the Bockstein phase; the field-theory response (4) is matched to the microscopic result, not used to define it. Quantization (8) is argued from the configuration-torus translation picture, and bilinearity (9) is proven in Appendix C using locality identities; neither step reduces to an input. The cited statistical-process framework [12,13,30] and gauge-theory anomaly facts [39-41] are prior results with independent co-authors [12,30,31] and are used as tools, while the new W_N cancellation is also proved directly in Appendix A under its stated assumption. Thus self-citation is present but not load-bearing. Non-circular caveat that should be weighed: Appendix A states "we restrict to Abelian defects for which each fixed-configuration sector is one-dimensional" (near Eq. (15)). The abstract's universality claim ("arbitrary N and all excitation dimensions p and q") goes beyond this Abelian one-dimensional-sector assumption; a Z_N-fusing defect with degenerate fusion space is not covered by the cancellation proof. This is a scope/correctness gap, not a circularity, and it does not raise the circularity score.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

No free parameters or new entities are introduced. However, five background assumptions are imported, two of which (one-dimensional sectors, remote detectability) directly affect the universality claim and Theorem 1.

axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Closed statistical phases are invariant under local symmetric redefinitions of open excitation operators (initial-state independence).
    Invoked in §2 and Appendix A; imported from [12,13,30], not re-derived. It is load-bearing for W_N being a well-defined phase.
  • domain assumption Each fixed-configuration sector of the defects is one-dimensional (Abelian defects).
    Appendix A explicitly restricts to this; needed for local cancellation and phase-valued W_N. Not established for general Z_N-fusing excitations with degenerate fusion spaces.
  • standard math Locality identities: nested commutators vanish when the common intersection of supports is empty.
    Used throughout Appendices B-C (e.g., Eq. (24)-(25)) as the basis for phase bookkeeping; standard for local operators.
  • domain assumption Remote detectability / condensation completion: every topological defect with trivial linking with all genuine operators is in the condensation completion and admits a topological gapped boundary.
    Theorem 1 proof (Sec. 3.1); [35] proves only r≤1, while the paper assumes the property for arbitrary r.
  • domain assumption The Bockstein anomaly of U(1) and SU(N^2)/Z_N gauge theories with k=1.
    Sec. 3.2 and Appendix H cite [39-41] (including the authors' own work) for the mixed Bockstein anomaly; not derived in this paper.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 34967 in / 13302 out tokens · 133116 ms · 2026-08-02T08:58:30.167119+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Braiding phenomena, from the charge-flux Aharonov-Bohm effect to anyonic statistics in fractional quantum Hall systems, are paradigmatic manifestations of topology in quantum physics. Ordinary mutual braiding between $p$- and $q$-dimensional excitations occurs in $d=p+q+2$ spatial dimensions. In this work, we introduce a universal construction of mutual statistics in the adjacent dimension $d=p+q+1$, applicable to excitations obeying $\mathbb Z_N$ fusion for arbitrary $N$ and all excitation dimensions $p$ and $q$. The corresponding invariant is the Berry phase accumulated in a simple $4N$-step microscopic unitary process built from local excitation operators on lattices. This process measures the linking of one excitation with the $N$-fold fusion junction of the other, encompassing particle-particle statistics in one dimension, particle-loop statistics in two dimensions, and loop-loop or particle-membrane statistics in three dimensions. We establish the quantization and bilinearity of the invariant and show that its field-theory response is governed by the Bockstein homomorphism, motivating the name Bockstein braiding statistics. Interpreting the excitation operators as open symmetry operators turns the same invariant into a direct microscopic diagnostic of mixed anomalies between symmetries. We demonstrate this diagnostic in a (1+1)D spin chain, where the nontrivial Bockstein braiding phase proves the mixed anomaly between the spin-flip symmetry $\prod X$ and the nearest-neighbor controlled-$Z$ symmetry $\prod CZ$. We construct explicit (2+1)D and (3+1)D lattice analogs, yielding new anomalous symmetry pairs, and apply the framework to strongly coupled (3+1)D continuum gauge theories. Nontrivial Bockstein braiding rules out a fully symmetric gapped phase, obstructs simultaneous condensation of the two excitations, and implies fractionalization of higher-form symmetries.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.02280 by Po-Shen Hsin, Yu-An Chen.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Comparison of the two mutual statistics. Operator [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Comparison of the two mutual statistics. Operator [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Configuration-space picture of the Bockstein braiding process for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Schematic spacetime geometry of Bockstein braiding. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Double-layer representation of the finite patch symmetry operators in the one-dimensional spin [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Double-layer representation of the finite patch symmetry operators in the one-dimensional spin [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Resolved representative of the 𝐴𝐵-particle hopping operators near the fusion point on the com￾pactified one-dimensional geometry. The fusion point 𝑗 is split into 𝑗− and 𝑗+, and the dashed outer arc indicates the additional edge connecting 𝑘 back to 𝑖. The 𝐴-type hopping operators 𝑋 = 𝑈 𝐴 𝑖 𝑗+ and 𝑅 = 𝑈 𝐴 𝑗+𝑘 are drawn above the interval, while the 𝐵-type hopping operators 𝐿 = 𝑈 𝐵 𝑖 𝑗− and 𝑌 = 𝑈 𝐵 𝑘 𝑗− are… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Schematic spacetime geometry of Bockstein braiding. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Triangular-lattice representation of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Geometry of particle-membrane statistics (adapted from Ref. [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Resolved representative of the 𝐴𝐵-particle hopping operators near the fusion point on the com￾pactified one-dimensional geometry. The fusion point 𝑗 is split into 𝑗− and 𝑗+, and the dashed outer arc indicates the additional edge connecting 𝑘 back to 𝑖. The 𝐴-type hopping operators 𝑋 = 𝑈 𝐴 𝑖 𝑗+ and 𝑅 = 𝑈 𝐴 𝑗+𝑘 are drawn above the interval, while the 𝐵-type hopping operators 𝐿 = 𝑈 𝐵 𝑖 𝑗− and 𝑌 = 𝑈 𝐵 𝑘 𝑗− are… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Resolved representative of the 𝐴𝐵-particle hopping operators near the fusion point on the com￾pactified one-dimensional geometry. The fusion point 𝑗 is split into 𝑗− and 𝑗+, and the dashed outer arc indicates the additional edge connecting 𝑘 back to 𝑖. The 𝐴-type hopping operators 𝑋 = 𝑈 𝐴 𝑖 𝑗+ and 𝑅 = 𝑈 𝐴 𝑗+𝑘 are drawn above the interval, while the 𝐵-type hopping operators 𝐿 = 𝑈 𝐵 𝑖 𝑗− and 𝑌 = 𝑈 𝐵 𝑘 𝑗− are… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Geometry of particle-membrane statistics (adapted from Ref. [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Square-lattice realization of the anomalous [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Finite square-lattice patch operators. Red dots denote the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Geometry of particle-membrane statistics (adapted from Ref. [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p042_8.png] view at source ↗

Review history (3 revisions) →

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Non-Clifford quantum cellular automata from invertible topological quantum field theories

    quant-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 8.0

    Invertible TQFT data is converted into explicit bounded-range quantum cellular automata, yielding new non-Clifford families and proving that the 5D w3^2 and w2^3 automorphisms are finite-depth circuits.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 11 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Significance of electromagnetic potentials in the quantum theory,

    Y. Aharonov and D. Bohm, “Significance of electromagnetic potentials in the quantum theory,”Phys. Rev.115(1959) 485–491

    1959

  2. [2]

    Fractional statistics and the quantum Hall effect,

    D. Arovas, J. R. Schrieffer, and F. Wilczek, “Fractional statistics and the quantum Hall effect,”Phys. Rev. Lett.53(1984) 722–723

    1984

  3. [3]

    Quantum mechanics of fractional-spin particles,

    F. Wilczek, “Quantum mechanics of fractional-spin particles,”Phys. Rev. Lett.49(1982) 957–959

    1982

  4. [4]

    Superconductors are topologically ordered,

    T. Hansson, V. Oganesyan, and S. Sondhi, “Superconductors are topologically ordered,”Annals of Physics313no. 2, (2004) 497–538

    2004

  5. [5]

    Topological quantum computation,

    R. Walter Ogburn and J. Preskill, “Topological quantum computation,” inQuantum Computing and Quantum Communications, C. P. Williams, ed., pp. 341–356. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1999

    1999

  6. [6]

    Fault-tolerantquantumcomputationbyanyons,

    A.Kitaev,“Fault-tolerantquantumcomputationbyanyons,”Annals of Physics303no.1,(2003)2–30

    2003

  7. [7]

    Topological quantum computation,

    M. H. Freedman, A. Kitaev, M. J. Larsen, and Z. Wang, “Topological quantum computation,”Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society40no. 1, (2003) 31–38

    2003

  8. [8]

    Non-Abelian anyons and topological quantum computation,

    C. Nayak, S. H. Simon, A. Stern, M. Freedman, and S. Das Sarma, “Non-Abelian anyons and topological quantum computation,”Rev. Mod. Phys.80(2008) 1083–1159

    2008

  9. [9]

    Generalized Global Symmetries,

    D. Gaiotto, A. Kapustin, N. Seiberg, and B. Willett, “Generalized Global Symmetries,”JHEP02 (2015) 172,arXiv:1412.5148 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  10. [10]

    Anomalous discrete symmetries in three dimensions and group cohomology,

    A. Kapustin and R. Thorngren, “Anomalous discrete symmetries in three dimensions and group cohomology,”Phys. Rev. Lett.112(2014) 231602. 42

    2014

  11. [11]

    Anomalies of discrete symmetries in various dimensions and group cohomology,

    A. Kapustin and R. Thorngren, “Anomalies of discrete symmetries in various dimensions and group cohomology,”arXiv:1404.3230 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  12. [12]

    Statistics of Abelian topological excitations,

    H. Xue, “Statistics of Abelian topological excitations,”Phys. Rev. B113(2026) 045143

    2026

  13. [13]

    Generalized statistics on lattices,

    R. Kobayashi, Y. Li, H. Xue, P.-S. Hsin, and Y.-A. Chen, “Generalized statistics on lattices,”Phys. Rev. X16(2026) 011010

    2026

  14. [14]

    Anyonic membranes and Pontryagin statistics,

    Y. Feng, H. Xue, Y. Li, M. Cheng, R. Kobayashi, P.-S. Hsin, and Y.-A. Chen, “Anyonic membranes and Pontryagin statistics,”Phys. Rev. Lett.136(2026) 086601

    2026

  15. [15]

    Pauli stabilizer formalism for topological quantum field theories and generalized statistics,

    Y. Feng, H. Xue, R. Kobayashi, P.-S. Hsin, and Y.-A. Chen, “Pauli stabilizer formalism for topological quantum field theories and generalized statistics,”arXiv:2601.00064 [quant-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  16. [16]

    Universal systems of∇-homology rings,

    M. Bockstein, “Universal systems of∇-homology rings,”C. R. (Doklady) Acad. Sci. URSS (N.S.)37 (1942) 243–245

    1942

  17. [17]

    Hatcher,Algebraic Topology

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

    2002

  18. [18]

    Braiding statistics of loop excitations in three dimensions,

    C. Wang and M. Levin, “Braiding statistics of loop excitations in three dimensions,”Phys. Rev. Lett. 113(2014) 080403

    2014

  19. [19]

    Cheshire charge in (3+1)-dimensional topological phases,

    D. V. Else and C. Nayak, “Cheshire charge in (3+1)-dimensional topological phases,”Phys. Rev. B96 (2017) 045136

    2017

  20. [20]

    Loop braiding statistics in exactly soluble three-dimensional lattice models,

    C.-H. Lin and M. Levin, “Loop braiding statistics in exactly soluble three-dimensional lattice models,”Phys. Rev. B92(2015) 035115

    2015

  21. [21]

    Generalized modular transformations in(3+1)Dtopologically ordered phases and triple linking invariant of loop braiding,

    S. Jiang, A. Mesaros, and Y. Ran, “Generalized modular transformations in(3+1)Dtopologically ordered phases and triple linking invariant of loop braiding,”Phys. Rev. X4(2014) 031048

    2014

  22. [22]

    Anyon and loop braiding statistics in field theories with a topologicalΘ term,

    Z. Bi, Y.-Z. You, and C. Xu, “Anyon and loop braiding statistics in field theories with a topologicalΘ term,”Phys. Rev. B90(2014) 081110

    2014

  23. [23]

    Classifying symmetry-protected topological phases through the anomalous action of the symmetry on the edge,

    D. V. Else and C. Nayak, “Classifying symmetry-protected topological phases through the anomalous action of the symmetry on the edge,”Phys. Rev. B90(2014) 235137

    2014

  24. [24]

    Topological theory of Lieb-Schultz-Mattis theorems in quantum spin systems,

    D. V. Else and R. Thorngren, “Topological theory of Lieb-Schultz-Mattis theorems in quantum spin systems,”Phys. Rev. B101(2020) 224437

    2020

  25. [25]

    Anomalous symmetries of quantum spin chains and a generalization of the Lieb–Schultz–Mattis theorem,

    A. Kapustin and N. Sopenko, “Anomalous symmetries of quantum spin chains and a generalization of the Lieb–Schultz–Mattis theorem,”Communications in Mathematical Physics406no. 10, (2025) 238

    2025

  26. [26]

    Higher symmetries and anomalies in quantum lattice systems,

    A. Kapustin and S. Xu, “Higher symmetries and anomalies in quantum lattice systems,” arXiv:2505.04719 [math-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  27. [27]

    Higher symmetries, anomalies, and crossed squares in lattice gauge theory,

    A. Kapustin and L. Spodyneiko, “Higher symmetries, anomalies, and crossed squares in lattice gauge theory,”arXiv:2507.16966 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  28. [28]

    Higher-form anomalies on lattices,

    Y. Feng, R. Kobayashi, Y.-A. Chen, and S. Ryu, “Higher-form anomalies on lattices,”Phys. Rev. Lett. 136(2026) 046504

    2026

  29. [29]

    Disentangling anomaly-free symmetries of quantum spin chains,

    S. Seifnashri and W. Shirley, “Disentangling anomaly-free symmetries of quantum spin chains,”Phys. Rev. Lett.136(2026) 216603. 43

    2026

  30. [30]

    Gravitational anomaly of(3+1)-dimensionalZ2 toric code with fermionic charges and fermionic loop self-statistics,

    L. Fidkowski, J. Haah, and M. B. Hastings, “Gravitational anomaly of(3+1)-dimensionalZ2 toric code with fermionic charges and fermionic loop self-statistics,”Phys. Rev. B106(2022) 165135

    2022

  31. [31]

    Topological invariants for symmetry-protected topological phase entanglers,

    C. Zhang, “Topological invariants for symmetry-protected topological phase entanglers,”Phys. Rev. B 107(2023) 235104

    2023

  32. [32]

    Higher Symmetry and Gapped Phases of Gauge Theories,

    A. Kapustin and R. Thorngren, “Higher Symmetry and Gapped Phases of Gauge Theories,”Prog. Math.324(2017) 177–202,arXiv:1309.4721 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  33. [33]

    On the classification of topological orders,

    T. Johnson-Freyd, “On the classification of topological orders,”Communications in Mathematical Physics393no. 2, (2022) 989–1033

    2022

  34. [34]

    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 Physics401no. 3, (2023) 3043–3107

    2023

  35. [35]

    Anomaly Obstructions to Symmetry Preserving Gapped Phases,

    C. Córdova and K. Ohmori, “Anomaly Obstructions to Symmetry Preserving Gapped Phases,” arXiv:1910.04962 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1910

  36. [36]

    Anomalies of coset non-invertible symmetries,

    P.-S. Hsin, R. Kobayashi, and C. Zhang, “Anomalies of coset non-invertible symmetries,”SciPost Phys.20no. 1, (2026) 006,arXiv:2503.00105 [cond-mat.str-el]

    arXiv 2026

  37. [37]

    Symmetry-enriched quantum spin liquids in (3 + 1)𝑑,

    P.-S. Hsin and A. Turzillo, “Symmetry-enriched quantum spin liquids in (3 + 1)𝑑,”JHEP09(2020) 022,arXiv:1904.11550 [cond-mat.str-el]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  38. [38]

    Generalized Hall conductivities in local commuting projector models: Generalized symmetries and protected surface modes,

    P.-S. Hsin and R. Kobayashi, “Generalized Hall conductivities in local commuting projector models: Generalized symmetries and protected surface modes,”Phys. Rev. B113no. 7, (2026) 075106, arXiv:2505.20384 [cond-mat.str-el]

    arXiv 2026

  39. [39]

    Generalized Symmetries Phase Transitions with Local Quantum Fields,

    P.-S. Hsin, “Generalized Symmetries Phase Transitions with Local Quantum Fields,” arXiv:2506.07688 [cond-mat.str-el]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  40. [40]

    On 2-Group Global Symmetries and their Anomalies,

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  41. [41]

    Discrete theta angles, symmetries and anomalies,

    P.-S. Hsin and H. T. Lam, “Discrete theta angles, symmetries and anomalies,”SciPost Phys.10no. 2, (2021) 032,arXiv:2007.05915 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  42. [42]

    Topological quantum memory,

    E. Dennis, A. Kitaev, A. Landahl, and J. Preskill, “Topological quantum memory,”Journal of Mathematical Physics43no. 9, (2002) 4452–4505

    2002

  43. [43]

    Exactly solvable lattice Hamiltonians and gravitational anomalies,

    Y.-A. Chen and P.-S. Hsin, “Exactly solvable lattice Hamiltonians and gravitational anomalies,” SciPost Phys.14(2023) 089

    2023

  44. [44]

    Higher cup products on hypercubic lattices: Application to lattice models of topological phases,

    Y.-A. Chen and S. Tata, “Higher cup products on hypercubic lattices: Application to lattice models of topological phases,”Journal of Mathematical Physics64no. 9, (2023) 091902

    2023

  45. [45]

    A formula for Stiefel-Whitney homology classes,

    R. Z. Goldstein and E. C. Turner, “A formula for Stiefel-Whitney homology classes,”Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society58no. 1, (1976) 339–342

    1976

  46. [46]

    Constraints on Supersymmetry Breaking,

    E. Witten, “Constraints on Supersymmetry Breaking,”Nucl. Phys. B202(1982) 253. 44

    1982