pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.19363 · v1 · pith:7GUGMIWCnew · submitted 2026-05-19 · ✦ hep-th

Non-invertible Symmetries in Weyl Fermions, and Applications to Fermion-Boundary Scattering Problem

Pengcheng Wei , Yunqin Zheng This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-20 04:43 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-th
keywords non-invertible symmetriesWeyl fermionstopological defectsconformal boundary conditionsduality defectsfermion scatteringgauging symmetries
0
0 comments X p. Extension
pith:7GUGMIWC Add to your LaTeX paper What is a Pith Number? 
\usepackage{pith}
\pithnumber{7GUGMIWC}

Prints a linked pith:7GUGMIWC badge after your title and writes the identifier into PDF metadata. Compiles on arXiv with no extra files. Learn more

The pith

Non-invertible topological defects in two-dimensional Weyl fermion theories are constructed by unfolding G-symmetric conformal boundary conditions from Dirac fermions.

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

The paper shows how to build non-invertible topological defects for n Weyl fermions in two dimensions. It starts from the existence of G-symmetric conformal boundary conditions for n Dirac fermions and unfolds them into defects that mix different G-representations. For abelian symmetries like U(1)^n these defects correspond to duality transformations from gauging finite groups. The approach also clarifies fermion scattering off conformal boundaries using the duality picture. This offers a systematic way to find and classify such defects in fermionic systems.

Core claim

We construct a family of non-invertible topological defects in two-dimensional theories of n Weyl fermions. The construction relies on the existence of G-symmetric conformal boundary conditions for n Dirac fermions. Upon unfolding, these boundary conditions become topological defects D of n Weyl fermions that intertwine the two G-representations, and they are generically non-invertible. For G=U(1)^n, we show that D is a duality defect associated with gauging a finite Abelian group Γ, and we give an explicit algorithm for determining Γ and its action on the fermions. We also show that the same finite-Abelian gauging description applies in certain restricted examples with non-Abelian G. By the

What carries the argument

The non-invertible topological defect D obtained upon unfolding G-symmetric conformal boundary conditions for n Dirac fermions into n Weyl fermions, which intertwines G-representations.

If this is right

  • For U(1)^n symmetries, the defect D is realized as a duality defect from gauging a finite Abelian group Γ.
  • An explicit algorithm determines Γ and its action on the fermions.
  • The finite-Abelian gauging description extends to some restricted non-Abelian G cases.
  • For G=SU(2) in the 1-5-7-8-9 problem, D cannot be a duality defect from gauging any finite Abelian group.
  • The duality perspective streamlines the derivation of fermion scattering from a conformal boundary.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • This method could be extended to classify non-invertible symmetries in other two-dimensional conformal field theories with fermions.
  • Applications might include understanding boundary states in condensed matter systems with Weyl fermions.
  • The distinction between abelian and non-abelian cases suggests different physical realizations for these defects.

Load-bearing premise

That G-symmetric conformal boundary conditions exist for the n Dirac fermions and can be unfolded to produce the topological defects in the Weyl fermion theory.

What would settle it

An explicit example of a symmetry G for which no G-symmetric conformal boundary conditions exist for the Dirac fermions, or a calculation showing the unfolded defect is invertible rather than non-invertible.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.19363 by Pengcheng Wei, Yunqin Zheng.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The folding trick. On the left is the theory of Weyl fermions with a topological [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Topological defect D is G-intertwining. The defects Ug and Vg can terminate topologically on D at a common junction. D¯ D Ug Vg Ug A Ug Ug = [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Transverse intersection of Ug with D ⊗ D ¯ = A. denote by A [57]: D ⊗ D ¯ = 1 ⊕ · · · ≡ A. (2.2) In fact, we can assign a canonical (co)algebra structure to A via (co)evaluation maps, pro￾moting it to a separable Frobenius algebra. The defect D is then the duality defect obtained by gauging the algebra A. We remark that this statement applies to a general topological defect, and D is not necessarily a Tamb… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Transverse intersection of Vg with D ⊗ D¯ = A′ . D O(x) D Oe(x) L = [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Passing the topological defect D through O, the point operator will become at￾tached to a line operator L ⊂ D ⊗ D¯ = A′ . seeing [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: A sequence of topological moves, showing the relation on torus partition function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Scattering process require mj = ⌈ Pn u=1 Vuj qui Nu − 1 2 ⌉. In other words, we derive the scattering process, as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_7.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We construct a family of non-invertible topological defects in two-dimensional theories of $n$ Weyl fermions. The construction relies on the existence of $G$-symmetric conformal boundary conditions for $n$ Dirac fermions. Upon unfolding, these boundary conditions become topological defects $\mathcal D$ of $n$ Weyl fermions that intertwine the two $G$-representations, and they are generically non-invertible. For $G=U(1)^n$, we show that $\mathcal D$ is a duality defect associated with gauging a finite Abelian group $\Gamma$, and we give an explicit algorithm for determining $\Gamma$ and its action on the fermions. We also show that the same finite-Abelian gauging description applies in certain restricted examples with non-Abelian $G$. By contrast, for certain non-Abelian symmetry structures, including the $G=SU(2)$ symmetry appearing in the $1$-$5$-$7$-$8$-$9$ problem, we prove that $\mathcal D$ cannot be realized as a duality defect for gauging any finite Abelian group. Finally, we explain how the duality-defect perspective gives a streamlined derivation of fermion scattering from a conformal boundary.

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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper constructs a family of non-invertible topological defects D in two-dimensional theories of n Weyl fermions. The construction starts from the existence of G-symmetric conformal boundary conditions on n Dirac fermions; upon unfolding, these become defects that intertwine the two G-representations and are generically non-invertible. For G = U(1)^n the defects are shown to be duality defects obtained by gauging a finite Abelian group Γ, with an explicit algorithm given to determine Γ and its action. The same description applies in certain restricted non-Abelian examples. For G = SU(2) in the 1-5-7-8-9 problem the paper proves that D cannot be realized as an Abelian duality defect. The duality-defect viewpoint is used to streamline the derivation of fermion scattering off a conformal boundary.

Significance. If the central constructions hold, the work supplies a systematic route to non-invertible defects in free-fermion theories and clarifies their relation to duality defects and boundary states. The explicit algorithm for determining Γ in the U(1)^n case and the proof that the SU(2) defect in the 1-5-7-8-9 problem is not an Abelian duality defect are concrete, falsifiable contributions that strengthen the paper. The streamlined scattering derivation is a useful application.

major comments (2)
  1. [§2] The central construction (abstract and §2) assumes the existence of G-symmetric conformal boundary conditions for n Dirac fermions without providing a general construction or classification for arbitrary G. This assumption is load-bearing: if such boundary conditions do not exist or fail to be conformal while preserving the full G action, the unfolding step does not produce the claimed topological defects D. The paper supplies an explicit algorithm only for G = U(1)^n and a counter-example for one non-Abelian case; a general existence proof or additional explicit constructions would be required to support the family of defects for general G.
  2. [§4.2] §4.2, the proof that the SU(2) defect in the 1-5-7-8-9 problem cannot be realized as an Abelian duality defect: the argument relies on representation-theoretic obstructions, but the precise matching between the unfolded defect and the would-be gauging data is not spelled out in sufficient detail to verify that all possible finite Abelian groups have been ruled out.
minor comments (2)
  1. [§3] Notation for the two G-representations that the defect intertwines is introduced without a dedicated table or diagram; adding one would improve readability when comparing Abelian and non-Abelian cases.
  2. [§5] The scattering derivation in §5 re-derives known results; a short comparison table with the original boundary-state calculation would make the streamlining benefit more transparent.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments. We respond to each major comment below and indicate the revisions we will make.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§2] The central construction (abstract and §2) assumes the existence of G-symmetric conformal boundary conditions for n Dirac fermions without providing a general construction or classification for arbitrary G. This assumption is load-bearing: if such boundary conditions do not exist or fail to be conformal while preserving the full G action, the unfolding step does not produce the claimed topological defects D. The paper supplies an explicit algorithm only for G = U(1)^n and a counter-example for one non-Abelian case; a general existence proof or additional explicit constructions would be required to support the family of defects for general G.

    Authors: We agree that the general construction is conditional on the existence of G-symmetric conformal boundary conditions. The manuscript provides a complete, explicit algorithm for the case G = U(1)^n (the primary family) together with concrete non-Abelian illustrations and one counter-example. A full classification of such boundaries for arbitrary G is a separate, extensive problem that lies beyond the present scope. In the revision we will add an explicit statement that the defects D are constructed whenever G-symmetric conformal boundaries exist, and we will emphasize the concrete results already obtained for U(1)^n and the restricted non-Abelian examples. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [§4.2] §4.2, the proof that the SU(2) defect in the 1-5-7-8-9 problem cannot be realized as an Abelian duality defect: the argument relies on representation-theoretic obstructions, but the precise matching between the unfolded defect and the would-be gauging data is not spelled out in sufficient detail to verify that all possible finite Abelian groups have been ruled out.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this observation. In the revised manuscript we will expand §4.2 to spell out the matching in greater detail: we will explicitly compare the representation content and fusion rules of the unfolded SU(2) defect against the possible actions of any finite Abelian group Γ, showing why no such Γ can reproduce the required intertwining. This will make the representation-theoretic obstructions fully explicit and confirm that all candidate Abelian gaugings are excluded. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; construction is one-way from assumed boundary conditions

full rationale

The paper's central construction explicitly takes the existence of G-symmetric conformal boundary conditions on n Dirac fermions as an external input, then unfolds them to produce the claimed non-invertible defects D on n Weyl fermions. This is a forward derivation rather than a self-referential loop. For G=U(1)^n an explicit algorithm determines the gauging group Gamma; for selected non-Abelian cases the paper proves non-realizability as Abelian duality defects. No quoted step reduces a prediction or first-principles result to a fitted parameter, self-citation, or definitional renaming of the output itself. The derivation therefore remains self-contained against the stated external benchmark of boundary-condition existence.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the existence of certain boundary conditions and the unfolding procedure; no free parameters or invented entities are mentioned in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Existence of G-symmetric conformal boundary conditions for n Dirac fermions
    Directly invoked as the starting point for constructing the defects via unfolding, per the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5751 in / 1299 out tokens · 40831 ms · 2026-05-20T04:43:43.510524+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

66 extracted references · 66 canonical work pages · 16 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Generalized Global Symmetries

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  2. [2]

    Lectures on Generalized Symmetries

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  3. [3]

    S.-H. Shao,What’s Done Cannot Be Undone: TASI Lectures on Non-Invertible Symmetries, inTheoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics 2023: Aspects of Symmetry, 8, 2023.arXiv:2308.00747

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  4. [4]

    Luo, Q.-R

    R. Luo, Q.-R. Wang, and Y.-N. Wang,Lecture notes on generalized symmetries and applications,Phys. Rept.1065(2024) 1–43, [arXiv:2307.09215]

    work page arXiv 2024

  5. [5]

    ICTP Lectures on (Non-)Invertible Generalized Symmetries

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  6. [6]

    Iqbal,Lectures on Generalized Global Symmetries

    N. Iqbal,Lectures on Generalized Global Symmetries. SpringerBriefs in Physics. Springer Cham, 8, 2025

    work page 2025

  7. [7]

    Kaidi,Introduction to Generalized Symmetries,arXiv:2603.08798

    J. Kaidi,Introduction to Generalized Symmetries,arXiv:2603.08798

    work page arXiv

  8. [8]

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

    work page 1988

  9. [9]

    P. H. Ginsparg,Curiosities at c = 1,Nucl. Phys. B295(1988) 153–170

    work page 1988

  10. [10]

    P. H. Ginsparg,APPLIED CONFORMAL FIELD THEORY, inLes Houches Summer School in Theoretical Physics: Fields, Strings, Critical Phenomena, 9, 1988. hep-th/9108028

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1988

  11. [11]

    Thorngren and Y

    R. Thorngren and Y. Wang,Fusion Category Symmetry II: Categoriosities atc= 1 and Beyond,arXiv:2106.12577

    work page arXiv

  12. [12]

    Topological defects for the free boson CFT

    J. Fuchs, M. R. Gaberdiel, I. Runkel, and C. Schweigert,Topological defects for the free boson CFT,J. Phys. A40(2007) 11403, [arXiv:0705.3129]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  13. [13]

    Delmastro, A

    D. Delmastro, A. Sharon, and Y. Zheng,Non-local conserved currents and continuous non-invertible symmetries,JHEP11(2025) 072, [arXiv:2507.22976]

    work page arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    M¨ oller and B

    S. M¨ oller and B. C. Rayhaun,Equivalence Relations on Vertex Operator Algebras, II: Witt Equivalence and Orbifolds,arXiv:2410.18166. 34

    work page arXiv

  15. [15]

    Yu and H

    X. Yu and H. Y. Zhang,von Neumann Subfactors and Non-invertible Symmetries, arXiv:2504.05374

    work page arXiv

  16. [16]

    Rayhaun,When can two QFTs be separated by a topological interface?,YITP-IAS (Kyushu Univ.) Workshop: Interfaces and Symmetry.(2026)

    B. Rayhaun,When can two QFTs be separated by a topological interface?,YITP-IAS (Kyushu Univ.) Workshop: Interfaces and Symmetry.(2026)

    work page 2026

  17. [17]

    Holomorphic Vertex Operator Algebras of Small Central Charges

    C. Dong and G. Mason,Holomorphic Vertex Operator Algebras of Small Central Charges,arXiv Mathematics e-prints(Feb., 2002) math/0203005, [math/0203005]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  18. [18]

    A. N. Schellekens,Meromorphic C = 24 conformal field theories,Commun. Math. Phys.153(1993) 159–186, [hep-th/9205072]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1993

  19. [19]

    van Ekeren, S

    J. van Ekeren, S. M¨ oller, and N. R. Scheithauer,Construction and classification of holomorphic vertex operator algebras,J. Reine Angew. Math.2020(2020), no. 759 61–99

    work page 2020

  20. [20]

    M¨ oller and N

    S. M¨ oller and N. R. Scheithauer,Dimension formulae and generalised deep holes of the Leech lattice vertex operator algebra.,Ann. Math. (2)197(2023), no. 1 221–288, [arXiv:1910.04947]

    work page arXiv 2023

  21. [21]

    van Ekeren, C

    J. van Ekeren, C. H. Lam, S. M¨ oller, and H. Shimakura,Schellekens’ list and the very strange formula,Adv. Math.380(2021) 107567, [arXiv:2005.12248]

    work page arXiv 2021

  22. [22]

    H¨ ohn and S

    G. H¨ ohn and S. M¨ oller,Systematic orbifold constructions of Schellekens’ vertex operator algebras from Niemeier lattices,J. Lond. Math. Soc.106(2022), no. 4 3162–3207, [arXiv:2010.00849]

    work page arXiv 2022

  23. [23]

    Boyle Smith, Y.-H

    P. Boyle Smith, Y.-H. Lin, Y. Tachikawa, and Y. Zheng,Classification of chiral fermionic CFTs of central charge≤16,SciPost Phys.16(2024), no. 2 058, [arXiv:2303.16917]

    work page arXiv 2024

  24. [24]

    B. C. Rayhaun,Bosonic Rational Conformal Field Theories in Small Genera, Chiral Fermionization, and Symmetry/Subalgebra Duality,arXiv:2303.16921

    work page arXiv

  25. [25]

    H¨ ohn and S

    G. H¨ ohn and S. M¨ oller,Classification of Self-Dual Vertex Operator Superalgebras of Central Charge at Most 24,arXiv:2303.17190

    work page arXiv

  26. [26]

    Tachikawa, K

    Y. Tachikawa, K. Tsuji, and M. Watanabe,What happens to wavepackets of fermions when scattered by the Maldacena-Ludwig wall?,arXiv:2603.25508

    work page arXiv

  27. [27]

    Cordova, D

    C. Cordova, D. Garc´ ıa-Sep´ ulveda, and J. A. Harvey,Generalized Level-Rank Duality, Holomorphic Conformal Field Theory, and Non-Invertible Anyon Condensation, arXiv:2512.24419

    work page arXiv

  28. [28]

    Ohmori and M

    K. Ohmori and M. Watanabe,Unpublished,

    work page

  29. [29]

    A. Ueda, V. V. Linden, L. Lootens, J. Haegeman, P. Fendley, and F. Verstraete, Perfect Particle Transmission through Duality Defects,arXiv:2510.26780. 35

    work page arXiv

  30. [30]

    Antinucci, C

    A. Antinucci, C. Copetti, G. Galati, and G. Rizi,Defect Conformal Manifolds from Phantom Noninvertible Symmetries,Phys. Rev. Lett.135(2025), no. 21 211602, [arXiv:2505.09668]

    work page arXiv 2025

  31. [31]

    Furuta, Y

    Y. Furuta, Y. Kusuki, and T. Onagi,Transmission coefficients from phantom currents, Phys. Rev. D113(2026), no. 4 045008, [arXiv:2511.00356]

    work page arXiv 2026

  32. [32]

    Watanabe,IPMU seminar: Callan-Rubakov effect and non-invertible defects.,

    M. Watanabe,IPMU seminar: Callan-Rubakov effect and non-invertible defects.,

    work page

  33. [33]

    Non-Invertible Symmetries and Boundaries for Two-Dimensional Fermions

    G. Arias-Tamargo, P. Boyle Smith, R. Mouland, and M. L. V. C. Hutt,Non-Invertible Symmetries and Boundaries for Two-Dimensional Fermions,arXiv:2605.13952

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  34. [34]

    A Twist on Scattering from Defect Anomalies

    A. Antinucci, C. Copetti, G. Galati, and G. Rizi,A Twist on Scattering from Defect Anomalies,arXiv:2605.13961

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  35. [35]

    J. M. Maldacena and A. W. W. Ludwig,Majorana fermions, exact mapping between quantum impurity fixed points with four bulk fermion species, and solution of the ’unitarity puzzle’,Nucl. Phys. B506(1997) 565–588, [cond-mat/9502109]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  36. [36]

    P. B. Smith and D. Tong,Boundary States for Chiral Symmetries in Two Dimensions, JHEP09(2020) 018, [arXiv:1912.01602]

    work page arXiv 2020

  37. [37]

    P. B. Smith and D. Tong,What Symmetries are Preserved by a Fermion Boundary State?,arXiv:2006.07369

    work page arXiv 2006

  38. [38]

    P. B. Smith and D. Tong,Boundary RG flows for fermions and the mod 2 anomaly, SciPost Phys.10(2021), no. 1 010, [arXiv:2005.11314]

    work page arXiv 2021

  39. [39]

    van Beest, P

    M. van Beest, P. Boyle Smith, D. Delmastro, Z. Komargodski, and D. Tong, Monopoles, scattering, and generalized symmetries,JHEP03(2025) 014, [arXiv:2306.07318]

    work page arXiv 2025

  40. [40]

    B. Han, A. Tiwari, C.-T. Hsieh, and S. Ryu,Boundary conformal field theory and symmetry protected topological phases in2 + 1dimensions,Phys. Rev. B96(2017), no. 12 125105, [arXiv:1704.01193]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  41. [41]

    Li, C.-T

    L. Li, C.-T. Hsieh, Y. Yao, and M. Oshikawa,Boundary conditions and anomalies of conformal field theories in 1+1 dimensions,arXiv:2205.11190

    work page arXiv

  42. [42]

    Y. Choi, B. C. Rayhaun, Y. Sanghavi, and S.-H. Shao,Remarks on boundaries, anomalies, and noninvertible symmetries,Phys. Rev. D108(2023), no. 12 125005, [arXiv:2305.09713]

    work page arXiv 2023

  43. [43]

    't Hooft anomalies and boundaries

    K. Jensen, E. Shaverin, and A. Yarom,’t Hooft anomalies and boundaries,JHEP01 (2018) 085, [arXiv:1710.07299]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  44. [44]

    Kikuchi and Y

    K. Kikuchi and Y. Zhou,Two-dimensional Anomaly, Orbifolding, and Boundary States,arXiv:1908.02918. 36

    work page arXiv 1908

  45. [45]

    Thorngren and Y

    R. Thorngren and Y. Wang,Anomalous symmetries end at the boundary,JHEP09 (2021) 017, [arXiv:2012.15861]

    work page arXiv 2021

  46. [46]

    Wei and Y

    P. Wei and Y. Zheng,On the Absence of Symmetric Simple Conformal Boundary Conditions,arXiv:2512.23976

    work page arXiv

  47. [47]

    van Beest, P

    M. van Beest, P. Boyle Smith, D. Delmastro, R. Mouland, and D. Tong, Fermion-monopole scattering in the Standard Model,JHEP08(2024) 004, [arXiv:2312.17746]

    work page arXiv 2024

  48. [48]

    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), no. 12 125016, [arXiv:2111.01139]

    work page arXiv 2022

  49. [49]

    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), no. 11 111601, [arXiv:2111.01141]

    work page arXiv 2022

  50. [50]

    Kaidi, G

    J. Kaidi, G. Zafrir, and Y. Zheng,Non-invertible symmetries ofN= 4 SYM and twisted compactification,JHEP08(2022) 053, [arXiv:2205.01104]

    work page arXiv 2022

  51. [51]

    Sun and Y

    Z. Sun and Y. Zheng,When are duality defects group-theoretical?,JHEP10(2025) 104, [arXiv:2307.14428]

    work page arXiv 2025

  52. [52]

    C. G. Callan, Jr.,Monopole Catalysis of Baryon Decay,Nucl. Phys. B212(1983) 391–400

    work page 1983

  53. [53]

    V. A. Rubakov,Adler-Bell-Jackiw Anomaly and Fermion Number Breaking in the Presence of a Magnetic Monopole,Nucl. Phys. B203(1982) 311–348

    work page 1982

  54. [54]

    T. D. Brennan,A new solution to the Callan Rubakov effect,JHEP11(2024) 170, [arXiv:2309.00680]

    work page arXiv 2024

  55. [55]

    T. D. Brennan,Callan-Rubakov effect and higher charge monopoles,JHEP02(2023) 159, [arXiv:2109.11207]

    work page arXiv 2023

  56. [56]

    Bolognesi, B

    S. Bolognesi, B. Bucciotti, and A. Luzio,Monopole-fermion scattering in a chiral gauge theory,Phys. Rev. D110(2024), no. 12 125017, [arXiv:2406.15552]

    work page arXiv 2024

  57. [57]

    Diatlyk, C

    O. Diatlyk, C. Luo, Y. Wang, and Q. Weller,Gauging non-invertible symmetries: topological interfaces and generalized orbifold groupoid in 2d QFT,JHEP03(2024) 127, [arXiv:2311.17044]

    work page arXiv 2024

  58. [58]

    Wang and X.-G

    J. Wang and X.-G. Wen,A Solution to the 1+1D Gauged Chiral Fermion Problem, Phys. Rev. D99(7, 2018) 111501, [arXiv:1807.05998]

    work page arXiv 2018

  59. [59]

    Fukusumi, Y

    Y. Fukusumi, Y. Tachikawa, and Y. Zheng,Fermionization and boundary states in 1+1 dimensions,SciPost Phys.11(2021), no. 4 082, [arXiv:2103.00746]

    work page arXiv 2021

  60. [60]

    Y. Choi, B. C. Rayhaun, and Y. Zheng,Generalized Tube Algebras, Symmetry-Resolved Partition Functions, and Twisted Boundary States,arXiv:2409.02159. 37

    work page arXiv

  61. [61]

    Ebisu and M

    H. Ebisu and M. Watanabe,Fermionization of conformal boundary states,Phys. Rev. B104(2021), no. 19 195124, [arXiv:2103.01101]

    work page arXiv 2021

  62. [62]

    A classifying algebra for boundary conditions

    J. Fuchs and C. Schweigert,A Classifying algebra for boundary conditions,Phys. Lett. B414(1997) 251–259, [hep-th/9708141]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  63. [63]

    Boundaries, crosscaps and simple currents

    J. Fuchs, L. R. Huiszoon, A. N. Schellekens, C. Schweigert, and J. Walcher, Boundaries, crosscaps and simple currents,Phys. Lett. B495(2000) 427–434, [hep-th/0007174]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  64. [64]

    TFT construction of RCFT correlators III: Simple currents

    J. Fuchs, I. Runkel, and C. Schweigert,TFT construction of RCFT correlators. 3. Simple currents,Nucl. Phys. B694(2004) 277–353, [hep-th/0403157]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  65. [65]

    Boyle Smith,SMG=MG,Symmetric mass generation, topological phases and lattice chiral gauge theories, SCGP workshop(2024)

    P. Boyle Smith,SMG=MG,Symmetric mass generation, topological phases and lattice chiral gauge theories, SCGP workshop(2024)

    work page 2024

  66. [66]

    K. Hori, S. Katz, A. Klemm, R. Pandharipande, R. Thomas, C. Vafa, R. Vakil, and E. Zaslow,Mirror symmetry, vol. 1 ofClay mathematics monographs. AMS, Providence, USA, 2003. 38

    work page 2003