Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 48 references

"Symmetry-from-Anomaly" in Condensed Matter related Constructions

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read In the 1D conductor and 3D Weyl semimetal models, the proper axial charge is the total mechanical momentum of electrons plus a gapped dark sector that must be a topological order.

desk verdict A clean 1D derivation and an attractive bulk-topological-order idea, but the 3D construction's central normalization step is unproven and the flavor counting looks inconsistent. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.09127 v1 pith:I4GBWQJS submitted 2025-06-10 cond-mat.str-el hep-th

Cenke Xu This is my paper
classification cond-mat.str-elhep-th
keywords ABJanomalyaxialsymmetrynoninvertibleWeylsemimetaltopologicalordermechanicalmomentumpartonconstructionChern-Simonsterm
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

The paper argues that in a 1D conductor and a 3D Weyl semimetal, the ABJ-anomaly's obstruction to a gauge-invariant axial symmetry can be removed by defining the proper axial charge as the total mechanical momentum of the electron system together with a gapped dark sector. In the 3D construction the dark sector must be a topological order, built from fractionalized partons, and the resulting axial rotation by angle $2\pi/N$ becomes a genuine conserved and gauge-invariant symmetry. The paper stresses that this proper axial symmetry is different from the noninvertible axial symmetry proposed in recent literature, because the topological order lives in the 3D bulk rather than on the 2D domain wall. If correct, this gives a concrete condensed-matter realization of symmetry-from-anomaly and identifies the axial charge with a mechanical quantity, total momentum, that has an immediate physical meaning.

What carries the argument

The central object is the mechanical momentum operator $P=p-qA$, which gives a gauge-invariant regularization of the axial charge; in these models $P=\frac{\pi}{N}Q_A$ with $Q_A$ the axial charge. The argument is carried by a partial translation operator on a subregion $V$, which acts as an axial rotation $\exp(i\frac{2\pi}{N}Q_A)$ and, through the mechanical momentum of the dark fermion, produces a $\Theta$-term in $V$ that reduces to a boundary Chern–Simons term with level $1/N$ when magnetic monopoles are massive. The dark topological order is constructed via partons $\chi_a$ ($a=1,\dots,N$) with charge $-e/N$ and $Z_A^N\times Z_B^N$ gauge fields, with the gauge-invariant bound state identified as the dark fermion; the key step is that the parton density-wave mass term is claimed to be gauge non-invariant and hence projected out, leaving only the ABJ term. This machinery converts the anomaly into a symmetry by absorbing the non-gauge-invariant part into the dark sector's charge.

What would settle it

Compute the $Z_A^N\times Z_B^N$ transformation of the mass term $\bar\chi_a\gamma_5 e^{i 2\pi a \gamma_5/N}\chi_a$ with the paper's charges ($\chi_a$ carrying charge $+1$ under $Z_A^N$ and permuted under $Z_B^N$); if the term is invariant, it survives the projection, the $\Theta$-term in Eq. (38) is not recovered, and the central 3D construction collapses.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the proper axial charge $Q_A$—the one that generates a conserved, gauge-invariant axial rotation at angle $\alpha=2\pi/N$—equals the total mechanical momentum of the gapless electron system plus a gapped dark sector. In the 1D example the dark sector is the hole band of a compensated conductor; in the 3D Weyl semimetal it is a $(Z_N)^N$ topological order whose partons each carry charge $-e/N$ and are coupled to $Z_A^N\times Z_B^N$ gauge fields. The dark sector's role is to supply, in a gauge-invariant way, the fractional polarization charge that cancels the non-gauge-invariant fractional Wilson line appearing in the naive axial rotation. The author claims that after projecting to the gauge-invariant sector, the parton density-wave mass term drops out and only the ABJ contribution remains, producing the required $\Theta$-term in the subregion and hence a boundary Chern–Simons term that is properly quantized. The resulting proper axial symmetry is invertible and distinct from the noninvertible axial symmetry of recent proposals, since the topological order resides in the 3D bulk rather than on the domain wall.

Load-bearing premise

The construction depends on the claim that the parton density-wave mass term $\bar\chi_a\gamma_5 e^{i 2\pi a \gamma_5/N}\chi_a$ is not invariant under the $Z_A^N\times Z_B^N$ gauge fields and is therefore projected out; the paper gives no transformation law for this term, and under the stated vector charge assignments it appears gauge invariant.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A Weyl semimetal at filling $k_F=\pi/N$ with such a dark topological order has an exact, conserved, gauge-invariant axial symmetry acting as a $2\pi/N$ rotation, despite the ABJ-anomaly.
  • The axial rotation operator is invertible (a unitary symmetry) in this construction, not noninvertible; the difference is that the topological order is in the bulk, not on the domain wall.
  • A magnetic monopole is dressed by opposite fractional polarization charges from electrons and dark sector, so translation leaves the monopole charge neutral.
  • The gravitational anomaly is not cancelled by this dark sector, so a further charge-neutral dark sector would be needed to keep the proper axial charge conserved under dynamical gravity.
  • The mechanism connects symmetry-from-anomaly to symmetric mass generation, since the dark sector is gapped without breaking translation symmetry.

Reading between the lines

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

  • We infer that the distinction between invertible and noninvertible implementations of symmetry-from-anomaly is a matter of where the cancelling topological order lives: bulk versus domain wall, which may serve as a design principle for lattice regulators of anomalous symmetries.
  • A testable extension: in a Weyl semimetal with a proximate $(Z_N)^N$ topological order, the axial charge measured via total mechanical momentum should stay conserved and a monopole should show no net polarization charge, while a gapless electron sector alone would show the ABJ anomaly.
  • The 1D model's hole dark sector is gapless, and gapping it without breaking translation in 1D is forbidden by the Lieb–Schultz–Mattis theorem, suggesting that the 3D topological order is essential and that a 1D version would require coupling to a 2D topological bulk.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper discusses "symmetry-from-anomaly" in condensed matter models, focusing on a 1D conductor and a 3D Weyl semimetal. It identifies the axial charge with mechanical momentum and argues that a "proper" axial charge, which is both conserved and generates a gauge-invariant 2π/N axial rotation, can be defined as the total mechanical momentum of electrons plus a dark sector. In 1D the dark sector is provided by holes; in 3D the paper proposes that the dark sector must be a topological order, constructed through a parton theory with Z_A^N × Z_B^N gauge fields. The paper distinguishes this proper axial symmetry from the noninvertible axial symmetry of recent field-theoretic proposals.

Significance. The 1D lattice derivation in Appendix A is a clean and self-contained derivation of the Schwinger anomaly from the current operator, and the physical identification of axial charge with mechanical momentum is illuminating. If the 3D construction were correct, it would provide a concrete lattice-realizable mechanism for "symmetry from anomaly" and would connect the ABJ anomaly to topological order in a new way. However, the central 3D claim is not established: the normalization and projection steps in Section IV B are asserted without derivation, and the proposed N-flavor dark sector is inconsistent with the charge-compensation premise on which the conservation of total mechanical momentum rests. These are load-bearing gaps, not presentation issues.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section IV B, Eq. (43)] The central step of the 3D construction is Eq. (43), which asserts that the physical dark-sector axial divergence is N times the projected sum of parton axial divergences. This normalization is never derived. Since ψ_d is the composite ε χ_1...χ_N, a physical axial rotation by angle α corresponds to a definite rotation of the constituent partons, and the relative normalization of the parton axial current to the physical current directly multiplies the ABJ coefficient in Eq. (38). If the correct factor differs from N, the Θ-term is scaled incorrectly and does not cancel the electron's level-1/N boundary term. The manuscript must define the symmetry action on partons and derive the current normalization; without this, Eq. (38) is not established.
  2. [Section IV B, N-flavors of ψ_d] The paper states that "we eventually will need N-flavors of ψ_d" and later concludes that the dark sector has a (Z_N)^N topological order. Each flavor of ψ_d is a gauge-invariant composite of N partons, each parton carrying charge -e/N, so each flavor carries charge -e. With N flavors all at the same density as the electron (charge +e in the convention of Eq. (11)), the total charge density is nonzero for N>1. This contradicts the compensated-charge assumption stated in Section II and used in Appendix A, which is the premise for the conservation of total mechanical momentum and hence for the proper axial charge. The N-flavor construction therefore appears internally inconsistent.
  3. [Section IV B, passage after Eq. (42)] The claim that the last term of Eq. (42) "is not gauge invariant under the Z_A^N × Z_B^N gauge field" is imprecise. Under the stated vector-like Z_A^N action, with χ_a carrying charge +1, the mass term is invariant; it is the orbit average under the Z_B^N cyclic permutation that vanishes. The gauge transformation law for Z_A^N should be specified explicitly, and the projection argument should be presented for the full gauge group, since the conclusion that only the ABJ term survives is load-bearing for the rest of the construction.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Throughout] There are several typos, including "Higged" for "Higgsed", "eventaully" for "eventually", and "straightforwadly" for "straightforwardly".
  2. [Section IV B, Eq. (42)] The mass term is written in a way that is easy to misread; writing it as 2im \barχ_a γ^5 e^{i2πaγ^5/N} χ_a with an explicit definition of the matrix exponential would improve clarity.
  3. [Section IV B, even N] The statement that the even-N case follows "straightforwardly" by introducing a bosonic dark sector is too terse, because the statistics of the composite and the nature of the Z_N topological order change for even N.
  4. [Section IV A, Eq. (38)] The assumption that magnetic monopoles of A are massive and invisible at low energy is stated, but its validity for the proposed lattice construction is not discussed; a brief justification would help the reader assess the reduction of the bulk Θ-term to a boundary Chern-Simons term.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the anomaly equations are external benchmarks and the dark-sector construction is explicit, not assumed.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The paper identifies the gauge-invariant mechanical momentum of a compensated electron-plus-dark system with the proper axial charge; this identification is derived from Newton's law and the Landau-level/Schwinger equations (Eqs. 14-16 and 31-33), not assumed as the target result. The 1D and 3D anomaly equations are compared with standard anomaly expressions, which serve as external benchmarks. The dark sector is deliberately built to satisfy the stated criteria, and the parton construction is attributed to external references (Refs. 20 and 21). The central projection step, Eqs. 42-43, is a concrete calculation whose correctness can be checked independently; even if the normalization or the projection assertion requires further justification, that is a technical correctness concern rather than circular reasoning. Citations to the author's own SMG papers appear only in the Outlook as future directions and are not used to establish the central claim. No fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction, and no load-bearing premise is imported from a self-citation. The construction may be debated on technical grounds, but it is not circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 3 invented entities

The central 3D construction rests on several domain assumptions (external EM field, charge neutrality, gapped dark sector, invisible monopoles) and on one ad hoc projection step: the gauge noninvariance of the parton mass term in Eq. 42. The projection is the only thing that removes the gapped sector's mass term from the anomaly calculation, so the ledger is dominated by that unproven input.

free parameters (2)
  • Commensurate filling k_F = pi/N (nu = 1/N) = nu = 1/N, k_F = pi/N, integer N
    The Z_N axial rotation is realized by translation only at this special filling; N is chosen by hand in both the 1D and 3D models rather than derived (Sections III A and IV A).
  • Dark sector flavor and color count N = N
    The dark sector is built from N flavors and N colors of partons; N is the same integer as the filling denominator, chosen so that the anomaly coefficients match the electron sector.
assumptions (8)
  • standard math ABJ and Schwinger anomaly equations for Dirac fermions
    The paper starts from the accepted anomaly equations (Eq. 1-4, 16, 33) and uses them as benchmarks for the proposed charges.
  • standard math Luttinger theorem relation k_F = pi*nu
    Used to fix k_F = pi/N from filling nu = 1/N in Eq. 14 and Section III A.
  • standard math Lieb-Schultz-Mattis theorem in 1D
    Used in Section III D to argue a gapped symmetric 1D dark sector requires a topological order, which cannot exist in 1D.
  • domain assumption External electromagnetic field with low strength, slow dynamics, and long wavelength modulation
    Stated as the standard solid state approximation in the Introduction; the derivation only applies in this regime.
  • domain assumption Total electric charge density of electrons plus dark sector is zero at low energy
    Needed for the total mechanical momentum to be conserved and gauge invariant (Section II and Appendix A assumption 4).
  • domain assumption Magnetic monopoles of A_mu are massive and invisible at low energy
    Used in Eq. 38 to reduce the bulk Theta-term to a boundary Chern-Simons term.
  • ad hoc to paper The parton density wave mass term in Eq. 42 is not gauge invariant under Z_A^N x Z_B^N and drops out after projection
    This is the load-bearing step that recovers Eq. 38 from the parton anomaly; it is asserted without a derivation or transformation law, and it is needed specifically to make the dark topological order work.
  • domain assumption The dark sector is gapped and does not affect the low energy electron physics
    One of the stated criteria in the Introduction; the whole construction depends on this separation of scales.
invented entities (3)
  • Dark sector fermion psi_d
    purpose: Carries charge -e and provides the mechanical momentum reservoir that compensates the electron ABJ anomaly, making the proper axial charge conserved and gauge invariant.
    The paper designs its signatures (monopole neutrality, opposite Fermi arcs) so that the dark sector cancels electron effects; there is no falsifiable prediction outside the model.
  • Parton fields chi_a with N colors
    purpose: Fractionalized charge -e/N constituents of psi_d used to build a gapped topological order via psi_d ~ epsilon * chi^N.
    Partons are gauge dependent mean field degrees of freedom; no independent experimental handle is provided.
  • Dynamical Z_A^N x Z_B^N gauge fields
    purpose: Gauge the parton construction, enforce the bound state structure, and define the (Z_N)^N topological order of the dark sector.
    Internal gauge fields introduced to make the construction work; they are not independently observable.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of "Symmetry-from-Anomaly" in Condensed Matter related Constructions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/I4GBWQJS

@misc{pith2026250609127,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: "Symmetry-from-Anomaly" in Condensed Matter related Constructions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/I4GBWQJS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.09127}
}
read the original abstract

The noninvertible axial symmetry constructed from the ABJ-anomaly has attracted enormous interest. We discuss the mechanism of "symmetry-from-anomaly" in condensed matter-related models in both 1d and 3d spaces (which correspond to (1+1)d and (3+1)d space-time). Within the models discussed here, we establish the connection between field theory quantities such as different versions of the axial charge, and quantities with simple physical meanings in our systems. In our models and likely a class of related constructions, the existence of a topological order is necessary for the purpose of properly defining the axial symmetry. But the proper axial symmetry we define, though requires a topological order, is different from the noninvertible axial symmetry discussed in recent proposals.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.09127 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. The energy bands of a Weyl semimetal in a uniform [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. On the XZ or YZ boundary, the Weyl semimetal of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    S. L. Adler, Phys. Rev. 177, 2426 (1969), URL https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRev.177.2426

    doi:10.1103/physrev.177.2426 1969

  2. [2]

    S. L. Adler and D. G. Boulware, Phys. Rev. 184, 1740 (1969), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRev.184.1740

    work page 1969

  3. [3]

    Y. Choi, H. T. Lam, and S.-H. Shao, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 161601 (2022), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.129.161601

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.129.161601 2022

  4. [4]

    Cordova and K

    C. Cordova and K. Ohmori, Non-invertible chiral symme- try and exponential hierarchies(2022), 2205.06243, URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2205.06243

    arXiv 2022

  5. [5]

    X. Wan, A. M. Turner, A. Vishwanath, and S. Y. Savrasov, Phys. Rev. B 83, 205101 (2011), URL https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.83.205101

    doi:10.1103/physrevb.83.205101 2011

  6. [6]

    N. P. Armitage, E. J. Mele, and A. Vishwanath, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 015001 (2018), URL https://link.aps. 10 org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys.90.015001

    doi:10.1103/revmodphys.90.015001 2018

  7. [8]

    Nielsen and M

    H. Nielsen and M. Ninomiya, Nuclear Physics B 193, 173 (1981), ISSN 0550-3213, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/ pii/0550321381905241

    arXiv 1981

  8. [9]

    A. J. Leggett, Rev. Mod. Phys. 47, 331 (1975), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys.47. 331

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.47 1975

Show all 48 references
  1. [10]

    W. P. Su, J. R. Schrieffer, and A. J. Heeger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 42, 1698 (1979), URL https://link.aps. org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.42.1698

    1979 doi

  2. [11]

    W. P. Su and J. R. Schrieffer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 46, 738 (1981), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.46.738

    1981

  3. [12]

    R. E. Prange, Phys. Rev. B 26, 991 (1982), URL https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.26.991

    1982 doi

  4. [13]

    D. J. Thouless, Phys. Rev. B 27, 6083 (1983), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB. 27.6083

    1983 doi

  5. [14]

    Zak, Phys

    J. Zak, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 2747 (1989), URL https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.62.2747

    1989 doi

  6. [15]

    R. D. King-Smith and D. Vanderbilt, Phys. Rev. B 47, 1651 (1993), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevB.47.1651

    1993

  7. [16]

    Vanderbilt and R

    D. Vanderbilt and R. D. King-Smith, Phys. Rev. B 48, 4442 (1993), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevB.48.4442

    1993

  8. [17]

    Resta, Rev

    R. Resta, Rev. Mod. Phys. 66, 899 (1994), URL https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys.66.899

    1994 doi

  9. [18]

    Watanabe and M

    H. Watanabe and M. Oshikawa, Phys. Rev. X 8, 021065 (2018), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevX.8.021065

    2018

  10. [19]

    M. E. Peskin and D. V. Schroeder, An Introduction To Quantum Field Theory(CRC Press, 1995)

    1995

  11. [20]

    Maciejko, X.-L

    J. Maciejko, X.-L. Qi, A. Karch, and S.-C. Zhang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 246809 (2010), URL https://link.aps. org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.246809

    2010 doi

  12. [21]

    Swingle, M

    B. Swingle, M. Barkeshli, J. McGreevy, and T. Senthil, Phys. Rev. B 83, 195139 (2011), URL https://link. aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.83.195139

    2011 doi

  13. [22]

    C. Wang, L. Gioia, and A. A. Burkov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 096603 (2020), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.096603

    2020 doi

  14. [23]

    Cheng, J

    M. Cheng, J. Wang, and X. Yang, (3+1)d boundary topological order of (4+1)d fermionic spt state(2024), 2411.05786, URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.05786

    2024

  15. [24]

    C´ ordova and K

    C. C´ ordova and K. Ohmori, Phys. Rev. D 102, 025011 (2020), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevD.102.025011

    2020

  16. [25]

    X.-L. Qi, T. L. Hughes, and S.-C. Zhang, Phys. Rev. B 78, 195424 (2008), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevB.78.195424

    2008 doi

  17. [26]

    A. M. Essin, J. E. Moore, and D. Vanderbilt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 146805 (2009), URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.146805

    2009 doi

  18. [27]

    A. A. Zyuzin and A. A. Burkov, Phys. Rev. B 86, 115133 (2012), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevB.86.115133

    2012

  19. [28]

    Rinkel, P

    P. Rinkel, P. L. S. Lopes, and I. Garate, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 107401 (2017), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.107401

    2017 doi

  20. [29]

    S. A. Parameswaran, T. Grover, D. A. Abanin, D. A. Pesin, and A. Vishwanath, Phys. Rev. X 4, 031035 (2014), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevX.4.031035

    2014

  21. [30]

    D. T. Son and B. Z. Spivak, Phys. Rev. B 88, 104412 (2013), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevB.88.104412

    2013

  22. [31]

    D. T. Son and N. Yamamoto, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 181602 (2012), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.109.181602

    2012

  23. [32]

    Gioia and R

    L. Gioia and R. Thorngren, Exact chiral symmetries of 3+1d hamiltonian lattice fermions (2025), 2503.07708, URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.07708

    2025 arXiv

  24. [33]

    Chatterjee, S

    A. Chatterjee, S. D. Pace, and S.-H. Shao, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 021601 (2025), URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.021601

    2025 doi

  25. [34]

    Fidkowski and A

    L. Fidkowski and A. Kitaev, Phys. Rev. B 81, 134509 (2010)

    2010

  26. [35]

    Wang and X.-G

    J. Wang and X.-G. Wen, Phys. Rev. B 107, 014311 (2023), 1307.7480, URL https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevB.107.014311

    2023 arXiv

  27. [36]

    Wen, Chinese Physics Letters 30, 111101 (2013), ISSN 1741-3540, URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/ 0256-307X/30/11/111101

    X.-G. Wen, Chinese Physics Letters 30, 111101 (2013), ISSN 1741-3540, URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/ 0256-307X/30/11/111101

    2013

  28. [37]

    Slagle, Y.-Z

    K. Slagle, Y.-Z. You, and C. Xu, Phys. Rev. B 91, 115121 (2015), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevB.91.115121

    2015

  29. [38]

    You, Y.-C

    Y.-Z. You, Y.-C. He, C. Xu, and A. Vishwanath, Phys. Rev. X 8, 011026 (2018), URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevX.8.011026

    2018 doi

  30. [39]

    Catterall and D

    S. Catterall and D. Schaich, Phys. Rev. D 96, 034506 (2017), 1609.08541

    2017 arXiv

  31. [40]

    Ayyar and S

    V. Ayyar and S. Chandrasekharan, Phys. Rev. D 91, 065035 (2015), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevD.91.065035

    2015

  32. [41]

    Catterall, Journal of High Energy Physics 1, 121 (2016), 1510.04153

    S. Catterall, Journal of High Energy Physics 1, 121 (2016), 1510.04153

    2016 arXiv

  33. [42]

    Ayyar and S

    V. Ayyar and S. Chandrasekharan, Phys. Rev. D 93, 081701 (2016), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevD.93.081701

    2016

  34. [43]

    Tong, Journal of High Energy Physics 2022, 1 (2022), 2104.03997

    D. Tong, Journal of High Energy Physics 2022, 1 (2022), 2104.03997

    2022 arXiv

  35. [44]

    He, H.-Q

    Y.-Y. He, H.-Q. Wu, Y.-Z. You, C. Xu, Z. Y. Meng, and Z.-Y. Lu, Physical Review B 94, 241111 (2016), URL https://journals.aps.org/prb/ abstract/10.1103/PhysRevB.94.241111

    2016 doi

  36. [45]

    Z. H. Liu, Y. Da Liao, G. Pan, M. Song, J. Zhao, W. Jiang, C.-M. Jian, Y.-Z. You, F. F. As- saad, Z. Y. Meng, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 156503 (2024), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.132.156503

    2024

  37. [46]

    N. Butt, S. Catterall, and A. Hasenfratz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 031602 (2025), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.031602

    2025 doi

  38. [47]

    Hasenfratz and C

    A. Hasenfratz and C. T. Peterson, Phys. Rev. D 109, 114507 (2024), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevD.109.114507

    2024

  39. [48]

    N. Butt, S. Catterall, A. Pradhan, and G. C. Toga, Phys. Rev. D 104, 094504 (2021), URL https://link.aps. org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.104.094504

    2021 doi

  40. [49]

    Wang and Y.-Z

    J. Wang and Y.-Z. You, Symmetry14 (2022), ISSN 2073- 8994, URL https://www.mdpi.com/2073-8994/14/7/ 1475

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.