Realizing modular data from centers of near-group categories

Qing Zhang; Zhiqiang Yu

REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 34 references

Realizing modular data from centers of near-group categories

T0 review · 3 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proves that two previously conjectural low-rank modular data sets are realized by condensing Drinfeld centers of near-group categories.

desk verdict Solid new existence result and two modular-data identifications; the uncertified numerical core and a Galois-conjugate overstatement are the only serious referee issues. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.20763 v2 pith:N5VCIMV5 submitted 2024-12-30 math.QA

Zhiqiang Yu , Qing Zhang This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.QA MSC 18M2018M15

keywords near-groupcategoryDrinfeldcentermodulardatacondensationTannakiansubcategoryclassificationGaloisconjugationrank10

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 establishes that two low-rank modular data sets from classification lists are actually realized by concrete categories built from near-group fusion categories. For the group $\mathbb{Z}/4\mathbb{Z}\times\mathbb{Z}/4\mathbb{Z}$, it proves the existence of a near-group category of type $\mathbb{Z}/4\mathbb{Z}\times\mathbb{Z}/4\mathbb{Z}+16$ associated with the symmetric bi-character $(\zeta_4)^{g_1h_1-g_2h_2}$, computes the modular data of its Drinfeld center (rank 304), and shows that condensing by the Tannakian subcategory $\mathrm{Rep}(\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}\times\mathbb{Z}/4\mathbb{Z})$ yields the rank-10 modular data listed as Equation (12) in [21]. The same condensation is also shown to be braided equivalent to the Drinfeld center of a self-dual fusion category of rank 4. The paper additionally computes the center of a near-group category of type $\mathbb{Z}/8\mathbb{Z}+8$, condenses it by $\mathrm{Rep}(\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z})$, and identifies the non-pointed factor's modular data with that of $C(\mathfrak{g}_2,4)$ up to the Galois conjugation specified in Corollary 3.14. A reader should care because these results turn conjectural entries in low-rank modular-data classifications into existence statements about actual modular categories.

What carries the argument

The computational engine is the system of fixed-point equations (4)--(7) from [15], whose solutions $(\xi,\tau,\omega)$ index a whole layer of simple objects of the Drinfeld center of a near-group category $G+n$. The paper solves these equations numerically, obtaining 152 triples for $\mathbb{Z}/4\mathbb{Z}\times\mathbb{Z}/4\mathbb{Z}+16$ and 44 triples for $\mathbb{Z}/8\mathbb{Z}+8$, and then assembles the block S-matrix using formulas (8)--(11). The other load-bearing mechanism is condensation: the center contains a Tannakian fusion subcategory, meaning a symmetric fusion category equivalent to the representation category of a finite group, and de-equivariantizing by it isolates a lower-rank modular category whose S-matrix is pinned down by the reconstruction method of [20,21] from its $\mathrm{SL}(2,\mathbb{Z})$ congruence representation.

What would settle it

Re-run equations (4)--(7) with certified interval arithmetic or algebraic elimination; finding even one additional solution triple $(\xi,\tau,\omega)$, or showing that a listed phase $\theta_{j,x}$ is not a rational multiple of $2\pi$ as required, would break the rank-304 or rank-88 center computation and the derived condensation data.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is an existence-and-realization statement: the near-group category of type $\mathbb{Z}/4\mathbb{Z}\times\mathbb{Z}/4\mathbb{Z}+16$ exists, uniquely up to fusion equivalence for its bi-character, its Drinfeld center has 304 simple objects, and the modular category obtained by condensing the Tannakian subcategory $\mathrm{Rep}(\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}\times\mathbb{Z}/4\mathbb{Z})$ has exactly the S- and T-matrices of the rank-10 data in Equation (12) of [21]. In addition, that condensed category is braided equivalent to the Drinfeld center of a rank-4 self-dual fusion category whose fusion rules are $Y_1\otimes Y_1=\mathbf{1}\oplus 2Y_1\oplus 2Y_2$, $g\otimes Y_1=Y_2$, and $g\otimes g=\mathbf{1}$. For the cyclic case, the center of the near-group category $\mathbb{Z}/8\mathbb{Z}+8$ contains a boson generating $\mathrm{Rep}(\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z})$, and its condensation contains a pointed factor $C(\mathbb{Z}/4\mathbb{Z},q)$; the complementary factor has the same modular data as $C(\mathfrak{g}_2,4)$ after the Galois conjugation described in Corollary 3.14.

Load-bearing premise

The numerical solver's lists of solutions to equations (4)--(7) are taken as complete and exact; if a triple was missed or a floating-point value is not actually an algebraic number, the rank counts and the S-matrix entries of the centers and condensations would change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The rank-10 modular data of Equation (12) is no longer merely a formal list; it is the modular data of a genuine modular category obtained by condensation.
Because the condensation is also the Drinfeld center of a rank-4 fusion category, the data carries a Lagrangian algebra, so the modular category is centrally realizable from a low-rank fusion category.
The non-pointed factor with modular data matching $C(\mathfrak{g}_2,4)$ arises from near-group centers, confirming the prediction in [29, Section 4] that such data appears in this family.
The existence of the near-group category of type $\mathbb{Z}/4\mathbb{Z}\times\mathbb{Z}/4\mathbb{Z}+16$ adds a new point to the classification of near-group categories of order 16.
The same pipeline of center, condensation, and representation reconstruction can be applied to other near-group categories to realize further low-rank modular data from [21].

Reading between the lines

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

Extension: if the numerical solution tables in the appendix are certified as exact algebraic data, the S- and T-matrices would define modular categories unconditionally; currently the construction inherits the solver's completeness assumption.
Extension: the same 152-triple solution set could be tested against the other quadratic forms $a_2,a_3,a_4$ considered in Proposition 3.1, since the paper proves only $a_1$ yields full $b$-solutions but does not formally certify the solver's completeness.
Extension: the modular-data equality with $C(\mathfrak{g}_2,4)$ suggests looking for a braided tensor equivalence, not just an equality of invariants, between the condensed factor and a known quantum-group category.
Extension: the rank-304 center may contain other Tannakian subcategories besides $\mathrm{Rep}(\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}\times\mathbb{Z}/4\mathbb{Z})$, and each would give a different condensation and potentially new low-rank modular data.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Two things worth knowing. The paper proves the existence of a near-group category of type Z/4Z x Z/4Z + 16 — the first for a non-cyclic group of order 16 — and realizes the previously conjectural rank-10 modular data from Ng–Rowell–Wen as a condensation of its Drinfeld center. That settles a concrete conjecture and extends the range of near-group classification. In the second half it computes the Drinfeld center of Z/8Z + 8 and identifies the non-pointed factor of its condensation with C(g2,4), up to Galois conjugation.

What's actually new and done well: Proposition 3.1 gives explicit solutions to Izumi's equations for the given bi-character, and the equivalence argument among the four b-solutions is clean. The center computation is a serious calculation — rank 304 — and the full modular data is shipped in Mathematica notebooks, so the paper is reproducible. The condensation argument via étale algebra actions and reconstruction of the S-matrix from SL(2,Z) representations is substantive; Lemma 3.5 and Theorem 3.8 are real steps, not black boxes. Proposition 3.9, showing the condensed category is the center of a rank-4 fusion category, is a nice extra. Remark 3.2 honestly flags the open question about other near-group categories.

Soft spots, in proportion. The 152 and 44 triples feeding Equations (8)–(11) are recorded only as floating-point phases in Appendix A. The paper does not certify that these correspond to exact algebraic numbers, nor that the solver found all solutions. The 304x304 and 88x88 center S-matrices, and consequently the condensation ranks and final identifications, all sit on that numerical list. That is the load-bearing gap. It is addressable — the structural skeleton is explicit and the data are in the source files — but a referee will need to verify or require certification. The omitted proof of Proposition 3.7 is minor: “same argument as Proposition 3.6” is acceptable if the elimination checks out. The C(g2,4) statement is overstated: Theorem 3.13 and the abstract say “same modular data,” while Corollary 3.14 reveals the match is up to replacing ζ8 and ζ3 by their inverses. That is a presentation fix, not a mathematical flaw.

Who this is for: specialists in modular category classification and near-group centers. It deserves a serious referee. I would send it to review, asking for a note on the completeness/certification of the numerical solution lists and a corrected Galois statement in the abstract. Conditional accept is the right posture.

Referee Report

3 major / 7 minor

Summary. The paper studies near-group fusion categories and their Drinfeld centers. It proves the existence of a near-group category of type Z/4Z × Z/4Z + 16 associated with the symmetric bicharacter (ζ_4)^{g1h1-g2h2} (Proposition 3.1), computes the modular data of its Drinfeld center (rank 304, Section 3.1.2) by solving the nonlinear system (4)–(7) from [15], and shows that the condensation by a Tannakian subcategory Rep(Z/2Z × Z/4Z) yields a rank-10 modular category whose modular data equals Equation (12) of [21] (Theorem 3.8). It further identifies this condensation with the Drinfeld center of a self-dual fusion category of rank 4 (Proposition 3.9). For the near-group category Z/8Z + 8, the paper computes the center (rank 88, Section 3.3.1), condenses by a boson, and proves that the non-pointed factor has modular data matching C(g2,4) up to the Galois conjugation specified in Corollary 3.14 (Theorem 3.13). The computations are supported by extensive tables in Appendix A and Mathematica notebooks in the arXiv source.

Significance. If the computational steps are certified, the paper resolves explicit conjectures from [21] and [29] and provides new realizations of modular data: the rank-10 data of [21] is realized as a condensation of the center of a near-group category and as the center of a rank-4 fusion category, and the C(g2,4) modular data is related to a near-group center. The combination of Izumi's equations with the reconstruction program of [20, 21] is natural and likely to be useful. The paper is transparent about its computational nature, shipping detailed tables and Mathematica notebooks, which is a significant strength. However, the central claims currently depend on unverified numerical solution lists and an omitted proof of a key elimination step, so the results are conditional on a certification pass.

major comments (3)

[Section 3.1.2, Appendix A, and Equations (8)–(11)] The assertion in Section 3.1.2 that solving Equations (4)–(7) yields exactly 152 triples (ω_i, τ_i, ξ_i), and the analogous assertion for Z/8Z+8 in Section 3.3.1 yielding 44 triples, is not certified. The tables in Appendix A record only floating-point phases for ξ_i and the integer k in ω_i = ζ^k_80 or ζ^k_48, with no exact algebraic forms, no interval/error bounds, and no proof of completeness of the solver output. This is load-bearing because Equations (8)–(11) construct the entire 304×304 and 88×88 center S-matrices from these triples, and the subsequent condensation computations leading to Theorems 3.8 and 3.13 depend on those entries. A missed or slightly inaccurate triple would change S_{j,j'} in Equation (10) and hence the objects used in Section 3.2. Please provide an independent certification of both the exactness of the listed solutions and the completeness of the lists, for example by exact algebraic elimination, verified interval arithmetic, or a rigorous numerical proof.
[Proposition 3.7, used in the proof of Theorem 3.8] The proof of Proposition 3.7 is omitted with the sentence 'This proposition can be proved by using the same argument as Proposition 3.6, we omit the details here.' This is not acceptable for a load-bearing step. Lemma 3.5 gives three candidate decompositions for the congruence representation ρ_D, and Theorem 3.8 requires eliminating two of them; Proposition 3.7 eliminates ρ_1 ⊕ 2ρ_2 ⊕ ρ_0, while Proposition 3.6 eliminates ρ_1 ⊕ ρ_2 ⊕ ρ_3 ⊕ 2ρ_0. Without a complete proof of Proposition 3.7, the identification ρ_D ≅ ρ_1 ⊕ ρ_2 ⊕ ρ_4 ⊕ ρ_5 ⊕ 2ρ_0 is not established. Please include the full argument or a precise reduction to the computations of Proposition 3.6 with all necessary inequalities and sign checks.
[Section 3.3.1 and Table 5] The computation of the S-matrix blocks s_{X,W} and s_{W,W} is described only as 'can be computed from equations in [14] using the data from Table 7', and the T-matrix for the W-objects is presented as a list of phase angles. As with the Z/4Z×Z/4Z case, no certification is supplied that the listed phases correspond to exact algebraic numbers or that the resulting 88×88 S-matrix satisfies unitarity and the Verlinde formula exactly. Since Theorem 3.13 and Corollary 3.14 compare the condensation's modular data with C(g2,4), please provide exact algebraic values and a machine-checkable verification of the modular data, or at least a rigorous bound-based certification.

minor comments (7)

[Section 3.1.1, Table 1] Proposition 3.1's uniqueness claim depends on the statement that 'only the quadratic form a1 leads to further solutions' and on the decimal phase values in Table 1. The completeness of the four solutions for b and the exactness of the Table 1 entries should be justified by an algebraic computation, even though the explicit formula in Equation (14) suffices for existence.
[Sections 1 and 3.2] The symbol G is used both for the group Z/4Z × Z/4Z underlying the near-group category and for the group Z/2Z × Z/4Z used in the condensation; this creates confusion in Theorem 1 and Section 3.2. Please choose distinct notation, e.g., H for the condensation group.
[Equation (12) and Theorem 3.8] In Equation (12) the parameter s is defined as s = -1 + 2i, while in Theorem 3.8 the S-matrix uses s = -1 + 2ζ_4. The two notations should be reconciled, since ζ_4 = i but the paper also uses ζ_4 in other contexts; a reader cannot tell without checking.
[Lemma 3.3] The factor 1/64 in the formula S_{F(V1),F(V2)} = (1/64) Σ_{g,h∈Z/4Z×Z/2Z} S_{g⊗V1,h⊗V2} should be explained explicitly as |G|^2 with G = Z/4Z × Z/2Z; the text says A acts freely but does not spell out the order-counting.
[Corollary 3.14] The phrase 'replace ζ8 and ζ3 by their inverses' is ambiguous: the cyclotomic entries in the T-matrix of C(g2,4) involve ζ_4, ζ_{12}, and ζ_{24}, and the precise Galois automorphism should be specified.
[Table 2, row for W_k] The expression 'A ⊗ W_k = ⊕_{k=1}^4 (W_k ⊕ W_{k+94})' misuses the summation index k for both the left-hand object and the summands; this should be rewritten with a distinct index or as an explicit list of four pairs.
[General notation] The notation χ_m^n is nonstandard and often ambiguous (e.g., χ_20^5, χ_180^14, χ_3^6). A short table defining χ_m^n and the values of ζ_k used throughout would greatly improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the target modular data are used as benchmarks, not inputs, and the self-cited condensation formula is independently sourced.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained relative to external inputs. Existence of the near-group category (Proposition 3.1) is obtained by solving the explicit equations of Theorem 2.1 from Izumi and Evans–Gannon, and the center modular data are computed by solving equations (4)–(7) and applying formulas (8)–(11) from the same external sources. The rank-10 modular data in Equation (12) from [21] and the C(g2,4) data computed in SageMath are used only as comparison targets after the condensation S-matrix is reconstructed; no parameter is fitted to these targets. The condensation step invokes [29, Theorem 2.2] or [17, Lemma 4.2] for S-matrix coefficients, and [17] is an independent source, so the self-citation is not load-bearing. The numerical solution lists in Tables 6 and 7 and the omitted proof of Proposition 3.7 are verifiability and correctness concerns, not circularity: they do not make the conclusion equal to an input by construction. Therefore no circular step is exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No constants were fitted to the target modular data. The construction solves fixed algebraic equations; the uncontrolled inputs are the unverified computational solution lists and the standard classification theorems, which are listed as axioms.

assumptions (3)

standard math Theorem 2.1 from [15,14]: a near-group category of type G+n corresponds to a solution (bicharacter, c, a, b) of Equations (1)-(3), and the Drinfeld center modular data is given by Equations (4)-(11).
The entire construction starts from this classification theorem, which the paper does not reprove.
ad hoc to paper The Mathematica solutions to Equations (4)-(7) listed in Tables 6 and 7 are complete and exact.
The center ranks 304 and 88, the simple-object decompositions, and all subsequent condensation computations are inferred from these numerical lists without formal certification or error bounds.
standard math The condensation/de-equivariantization theorems from [10,17] and the classification of irreducible representations of SL(2,Z/p^m Z) from [24,25,20] are valid.
These results justify the passage from Z(C) to Z(C)_G and the reconstruction of the S-matrix from the SL(2,Z) representation.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Realizing modular data from centers of near-group categories." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/N5VCIMV5

@misc{pith2026241220763,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Realizing modular data from centers of near-group categories},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/N5VCIMV5}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.20763}
}

abstract

In this paper, we show the existence of a near-group category of type $\mathbb{Z} / 4\mathbb{Z} \times \mathbb{Z} / 4\mathbb{Z}+16$ and compute the modular data of its Drinfeld center. We prove that a modular data of rank $10$ can be obtained through condensation of the Drinfeld center of the near-group category $\mathbb{Z} / 4\mathbb{Z} \times \mathbb{Z} / 4\mathbb{Z}+16$, and it can also be realized as the Drinfeld center of a fusion category of rank $4$. Moreover, we compute the modular data for the Drinfeld center of a near-group category $\mathbb{Z} / 8\mathbb{Z}+8$ and show that the non-pointed factor of its condensation has the same modular data as the quantum group category $C(\mathfrak{g}_2, 4)$.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages

[15]

M. Izumi. The structure of sectors associated with Longo–Re hren inclusions II: exam- ples. Rev. Math. Phys , 13(05):603–674, 2001

work page 2001
[21]

S.-H. Ng, E. C. Rowell, and X.-G. Wen. Classiﬁcation of modular dat a up to rank 11. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.09670 , 2023

arXiv 2023
[29]

E. C. Rowell, H. Solomon, and Q. Zhang. On near-group centers and super-modular categories. In Quantum Symmetries , volume 813 of Contemp. Math. , pages 129–149. Amer. Math. Soc.y, Providence, RI, 2025

work page 2025
[14]

D. E. Evans and T. Gannon. Near-group fusion categories and their doubles. Adv. Math., 255:586–640, 2014. 28

work page 2014
[1]

Bakalov and A

B. Bakalov and A. Kirillov, Jr. Lectures on tensor categories and modular functors , volume 21 of University Lecture Series . American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2001

2001
[2]

Brugui´ eres

A. Brugui´ eres. Cat´ egories pr´ emodulaires, modularization et invariants des vari´ et´ es de dimension. Math. Ann , 316(2):215–236, 2000

work page 2000
[3]

Bruillard, S.-H

P. Bruillard, S.-H. Ng, E. C. Rowell, and Z. Wang. On classiﬁcation of modular cate- gories by rank,. Int. Math. Res. Not , 2016(24):7546–7588, 2016

work page 2016
[4]

Bruillard, S.-H

P. Bruillard, S.-H. Ng, E. C. Rowell, and Z. Wang. Rank-ﬁniteness f or modular cate- gories. J. Amer. Math. Soc. , 29(3):857–881, 2016

work page 2016

Show all 34 references

[5]

P. G. Budinski. Exotic fusion categories and their modular data. M aster’s thesis, University of Albert, 2021

2021
[6]

Coste and T

A. Coste and T. Gannon. Remarks on Galois symmetry in rational c onformal ﬁeld theories. Phys. Lett. B , 323(3-4):316–321, 1994

1994
[7]

Davydov, M

A. Davydov, M. M¨ uger, D. Nikshych, and V. Ostrik. The Witt gro up of non-degenerate braided fusion categories. J. Reine. Angew. Math , 677:135–177, 2013

2013
[8]

de Boer and J

J. de Boer and J. Goeree. Markov traces and II 1 factors in conformal ﬁeld theory. Comm. Math. Phys. , 139(2):267–304, 1991

1991
[9]

C. Dong, X. Lin, and S.-H. Ng. Congruence property in conforma l ﬁeld theory. Algebra Number Theory, 9(9):2121–2166, 2015

2015
[10]

Drinfeld, S

V. Drinfeld, S. Gelaki, D. Nikshych, and V. Ostrik. On braided fus ion category I. Sel. Math. New Ser , 16:1–119, 2010

2010
[11]

Edie-Michell, M

C. Edie-Michell, M. Izumi, and D. Penneys. Classiﬁcation of Z2-quadratic unitary fusion categories. arXiv:2108.01564, 2021

2021 arXiv
[12]

Etingof, S

P. Etingof, S. Gelaki, D. Nikshych, and V. Ostrik. Tensor categories. Mathematical Surveys and Monographs. American Mathematical Society, Provid ence, RI, 2015

2015
[13]

Etingof, D

P. Etingof, D. Nikshych, and V.Ostrik. Weakly group-theoretic al and solvable fusion categories. Adv.Math, 226:176–205, 2011

2011
[16]

M. Izumi. A Cuntz algebra approach to the classiﬁcation of near -group categories. In Proceedings of the 2014 Maui and 2015 Qinhuangdao conferenc es in honour of Vaughan F. R. Jones’ 60th birthday , pages 222–343. Proc. Centre Math. Appl. Austral. Nat. Univ., 46, Austral. Nat....

2014
[17]

Kirillov, Jr and V

A. Kirillov, Jr and V. Ostrik. On a q-analogue of the McKay corres pondence and the ade classiﬁcation of sl2 conformal ﬁeld theories. Adv. Math, 171(2):183–227, 2002

2002
[18]

Moore and N

G. Moore and N. Seiberg. Classical and quantum conformal ﬁeld theory. Comm. Math. Phys., 123(2):177–254, 1989

1989
[19]

M. M¨ uger. On the structure of modular categories. Proc. London Math. Soc , 87(2):291–308, 2003

2003
[20]

S.-H. Ng, E. C. Rowell, Z. Wang, and X. Wen. Reconstruction of m odular data from SL2pZq representations. Comm. Math. Phys , 402:2465–2545, 2023

2023
[22]

Ng and P

S.-H. Ng and P. Schauenburg. Congruence subgroups and gen eralized Frobenius-Schur indicators. Comm. Math. Phys. , 300(1):1–46, 2010

2010
[23]

S.-H. Ng, Y. Wang, and Q. Zhang. Modular categories with trans itive galois actions. Comm. Math. Phys , 390(3):1271–1310, 2022

2022
[24]

A. Nobs. Die irreduziblen Darstellungen der Gruppen SL 2pZpq, insbesondere SL 2pZ2q. I. Comment. Math. Helv. , 51(4):465–489, 1976

1976
[25]

Nobs and J

A. Nobs and J. Wolfart. Die irreduziblen darstellungen der grupp en SL 2pZpq, insbeson- dere SL 2pZpq. II. Comment. Math. Helv , 51(4):491–526, 1976

1976
[26]

V. Ostrik. Pivotal fusion categories of rank 3. Mosc. Math. J , 15(2):373–396, 2015

2015
[27]

Plavnik, A

J. Plavnik, A. Schopieray, Z. Yu, and Q. Zhang. Modular tensor categories, subcate- gories, and Galois orbits. Transform. Groups, 29:1623–1648, 2024

2024
[28]

Rowell, R

E. Rowell, R. Stong, and Z. Wang. On classiﬁcation of modular ten sor categories. Comm. Math. Phys. , 292(2):343–389, 2009

2009
[30]

Schopieray

A. Schopieray. Categoriﬁcation of integral group rings exten ded by one dimension. J. London. Math. Soc , 108(4):1617–641, 2023

2023
[31]

J. Siehler. Near-group categories. Algebr. Geom. Topol , 3:719–775, 2003

2003
[32]

Tambara and S

D. Tambara and S. Yamagami. Tensor categories with fusion rule s of self-duality for ﬁnite abelian groups. J. Algebra, 209(2):692–707, 1998

1998
[33]

SageMath: Fusion Rings

The Sage Developers. SageMath: Fusion Rings . The Sage Development Team, 2024. https://www.sagemath.org

2024
[34]

V. G. Turaev. Modular categories and 3-manifold invariants. Int. J. Mod. Phys. B , 6(11n12):1807–1824, 1992. Email address : zhiqyumath@yzu.edu.cn Email address : qingzhang@ucsb.edu (1) School of Mathematical Science, Yangzhou University, Yang zhou, 225002, China 29 (2) Depart...

1992

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [15]

M. Izumi. The structure of sectors associated with Longo–Re hren inclusions II: exam- ples. Rev. Math. Phys , 13(05):603–674, 2001

work page 2001

[2] [21]

S.-H. Ng, E. C. Rowell, and X.-G. Wen. Classiﬁcation of modular dat a up to rank 11. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.09670 , 2023

arXiv 2023

[3] [29]

E. C. Rowell, H. Solomon, and Q. Zhang. On near-group centers and super-modular categories. In Quantum Symmetries , volume 813 of Contemp. Math. , pages 129–149. Amer. Math. Soc.y, Providence, RI, 2025

work page 2025

[4] [14]

D. E. Evans and T. Gannon. Near-group fusion categories and their doubles. Adv. Math., 255:586–640, 2014. 28

work page 2014

[5] [1]

Bakalov and A

B. Bakalov and A. Kirillov, Jr. Lectures on tensor categories and modular functors , volume 21 of University Lecture Series . American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2001

2001

[6] [2]

Brugui´ eres

A. Brugui´ eres. Cat´ egories pr´ emodulaires, modularization et invariants des vari´ et´ es de dimension. Math. Ann , 316(2):215–236, 2000

work page 2000

[7] [3]

Bruillard, S.-H

P. Bruillard, S.-H. Ng, E. C. Rowell, and Z. Wang. On classiﬁcation of modular cate- gories by rank,. Int. Math. Res. Not , 2016(24):7546–7588, 2016

work page 2016

[8] [4]

Bruillard, S.-H

P. Bruillard, S.-H. Ng, E. C. Rowell, and Z. Wang. Rank-ﬁniteness f or modular cate- gories. J. Amer. Math. Soc. , 29(3):857–881, 2016

work page 2016