Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 74 references

Connecting the tensor-categorical formulation of anyon condensation with operator algebras and entropic order parameters

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read An anyon condensation's entropic order parameter is the logarithm of a dimension count fixed by the condensable algebra, and the count never exceeds that algebra's quantum dimension.

desk verdict A readable, explicitly heuristic dictionary connecting anyon condensation in MTCs and DHR bimodules, with correct examples and a restatement of a known bound, whose main proof step remains an unproved assumption. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.12157 v1 pith:AI5NNL3T submitted 2026-08-12 cond-mat.str-el hep-thquant-ph

Hua-Chen Zhang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-elhep-thquant-ph
keywords anyoncondensationtopologicalordermodulartensorcategoryDHRbimodulesquasi-localC*-algebraconditionalexpectationrelativeentropyentropicparameter
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 tries to establish that anyon condensation—the transition in which bosonic anyons are absorbed into the vacuum and topological orders change—admits one common description in tensor categories and in operator algebras, and that the operator-algebraic side makes the information-theoretic cost of the condensation exact. Its central claim is that for a topological state $\omega$ on the boundary algebra $M$, the entropic order parameter is the relative entropy $S(\omega\parallel\omega\circ E)$ between $\omega$ and its lift by the conditional expectation $E$ of the algebra extension, and that this relative entropy equals $\log D$ where $D=\sum_a n_\omega(a)n_A(a)$ counts the ways bulk anyons can end on both the state's boundary and the condensate. Because the count $n_\omega(a)$ of junction operators for anyon type $a$ never exceeds the quantum dimension $d_a$, one gets $S(\omega\parallel\omega\circ E)\le \log d_A$, with $d_A$ the quantum dimension of the condensable algebra. A sympathetic reader would care because the proof is a short dimension count rather than a technical index theorem, and it turns the entropic order parameter into computable data of the modular tensor category.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the conditional expectation $E\colon \mathcal{A}\to M$ associated with an irreducible local inclusion $M\subset \mathcal{A}$; diagrammatically it is the operation of collapsing the topological layer and pushing a junction operator onto the boundary, and its bimodule property $E(O_1\tilde O O_2)=O_1E(\tilde O)O_2$ makes the lifted state $\omega\circ E$ well defined. The proof then reduces to a dimension count: genuine local operators in $\mathcal{A}$ are graded by bulk simple lines $a$ that can end on both the boundary $L_\omega$ and the interface $A$, with multiplicities $n_\omega(a)$ and $n_A(a)$, so their linear space has dimension $D=\sum_a n_\omega(a)n_A(a)$. Since $E$ sends each such operator to a multiple of the identity in $M$, the density matrix of $\omega\circ E$ is $D^{-1}$ times the identity, yielding $S(\omega\parallel\omega\circ E)=\log D$; the categorical constraint $n_\omega(a)\le d_a$ then gives $S\le \log d_A$.

What would settle it

Take a finite fusion spin chain realizing the condensation $A_1=1\oplus e^2$ in $\mathrm{Z}(\mathrm{Rep}(\mathbb{Z}_4))$, prepare the pure topological state labelled by the Lagrangian algebra $A_4$, construct the conditional expectation of the algebra extension, and compute the relative entropy between the two states numerically; the paper's formula requires $S=\log 2$ exactly, so any deviation from the tabulated $D$-values would show that the conditional expectation does not act as the maximally mixing map assumed in the proof.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's core discovery, stated on its own terms, is that the tensor-categorical data of a condensation are read off from an inclusion $M\subset \mathcal{A}$ of quasi-local $\mathrm{C}^*$-algebras: a condensable algebra $A$ defines the extended algebra $\mathcal{A}$, and the post-condensation modular tensor category is $\mathcal{C}^{\mathrm{loc}}_A\simeq \mathrm{DHR}(\mathcal{A})$, the category of localisable DHR bimodules over the extended algebra. For a pure topological state $\omega$ labelled by a Lagrangian algebra $L_\omega$, the conditional expectation $E\colon \mathcal{A}\to M$ lifts $\omega$ to $\omega\circ E$, and the lifted state is maximally mixed on the space of genuinely local operators in $\mathcal{A}$. Counting junction operators for bulk lines that can end on both $L_\omega$ and the condensate gives $D=\sum_a n_\omega(a)n_A(a)$, so $S(\omega\parallel\omega\circ E)=\log D$; since $n_\omega(a)\le d_a$, the bound $S(\omega\parallel\omega\circ E)\le \log d_A$ follows. The examples in the paper compute these $D$ values for toric code, $\mathrm{Z}(\mathrm{Rep}(\mathbb{Z}_4))$, $\mathrm{Z}(\mathrm{Rep}(S_3))$, double Fibonacci, and double Ising theories.

Load-bearing premise

The proof assumes that the conditional expectation sends every genuinely local operator in the extended algebra to a multiple of the identity in $M$, making the lifted state exactly maximally mixed on a $D$-dimensional space; if any local operator survives the expectation nontrivially, the equality $S(\omega\parallel\omega\circ E)=\log D$ and the bound as stated do not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For any pure topological state, the entropic order parameter takes the exact form $\log D$ with $D=\sum_a n_\omega(a)n_A(a)$, so the full list of its possible values is determined by the modular tensor category and the choice of condensable algebra.
  • The bound $S(\omega\parallel\omega\circ E)\le \log d_A$ follows from the coefficient inequality $n_\omega(a)\le d_a$; saturation requires a state whose Lagrangian algebra contains every simple object of $A$ with multiplicity $d_a$, forcing those quantum dimensions to be integers.
  • The post-condensation topological order is the DHR bimodule category of the extended algebra, $\mathcal{C}^{\mathrm{loc}}_A\simeq \mathrm{DHR}(\mathcal{A})$, so the same algebra extension carries both the categorical and operator-algebraic descriptions.
  • In fully confining (Lagrangian) condensations the entropic order parameter need not saturate the bound: for the double Fibonacci theory the paper finds $S=\log 2$ while $\log d_L=\log(1+d_\tau^2)$.

Reading between the lines

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

  • One could test the equality $S=\log D$ directly in a tensor-network or exact-diagonalization realization of a fusion spin chain, since the conditional expectation is encoded in the algebra extension; a numerical relative entropy that deviates from the tabulated $D$-values would pinpoint where the maximally-mixed assumption fails.
  • The construction is restricted to topological orders of trivial Witt class because it starts from a gapped boundary; if the $\mathrm{DHR}(\mathcal{A})$ identification extends to chiral orders through non-topological boundaries, the same dimension count would give a bound for chiral anyon condensations.
  • The saturation condition suggests using the gap between $S$ and $\log d_A$ as a diagnostic of how far a condensate is from being Lagrangian, with non-integral quantum dimensions making exact saturation impossible on categorical grounds.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a dictionary between the tensor-categorical formulation of anyon condensation and an operator-algebraic formulation built on DHR bimodules over quasi-local C*-algebras. A condensable algebra A in an MTC C is represented by an irreducible inclusion M⊂A with a conditional expectation E, and the post-condensation theory is argued to be DHR(A)≅C_loc^A. For a topological state ω (labelled by a Lagrangian algebra Lω), the entropic order parameter is defined as the relative entropy S(ω||ω∘E), and the paper claims that for pure states this equals log D with D=Σ_a n_ω(a)n_A(a), yielding the bound S(ω||ω∘E)≤log d_A. The final section works out the value log D for several examples: toric code, Z(Rep(Z4)), Z(Rep(S3)), Fib⊠Fib and Ising⊠Ising.

Significance. The paper is a conceptual exposition aimed at making the connection between tensor-categorical and operator-algebraic descriptions of anyon condensation manifest. If the central derivation were sound, the result would be a useful and transparent proof of the entropic bound, and the worked examples would illustrate the formalism concretely. The paper explicitly disclaims rigorous proofs, so its value lies in the diagrammatic dictionary and the simplicity of the bound's derivation. However, the key step in deriving S=log D and hence the bound (2.8) relies on an assertion about the conditional expectation that is false as stated, and on an unspecified extension of ω to the larger algebra. Because this step directly carries the main quantitative claim, the present version does not support the advertised simple proof.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. 2.3, Eq. (2.8)] The proof of S(ω||ω∘E)=log D rests on the claim that 'E maps any genuinely local operator in A to the identity operator in M'. This is not correct: E is a conditional expectation onto M, so E(O)=O for O∈M rather than 1_M. The property actually needed for ρ_{ω∘E}=D^{-1}diag(1,...,1) is an orthogonality condition of the form E(O_i^† O_j)=δ_{ij}1_M for the D-dimensional basis of local operators. The paper neither proves this condition for the diagrammatic junction basis nor specifies how the state ω on M is extended to a state on A, which is necessary for the trace formula (2.5) to be defined on a common algebra. Without these ingredients, ρ_{ω∘E} need not be maximally mixed over the D-dimensional space, and the equality S=log D is an extra assumption rather than a derivation. Since Eq. (2.8) is the central quantitative claim, this gap is load-bearing.
  2. [Sec. 2.2, footnote 10] The identification DHR(A)≅C_loc^A, presented as part of the dictionary and used to justify the post-condensation description, depends on the unproved assumption that a strongly tensor generating object in C_L ⊠_C C_A descends from M in C_L. The footnote states this is 'believed' to be the case. The claim should either be proved or explicitly demoted to a conjecture; as written, the isomorphism D=C_loc^A in the displayed punchline after Eq. (2.1) is not established.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 2.3, Eq. (2.5)] The relative entropy S(ω||ω∘E) is written as Tr[ρ_ω(log ρ_ω - log ρ_{ω∘E})], but as stated ω and ω∘E are states on different algebras (M and A, respectively). The manuscript should specify the embedding of M into A and the chosen extension of ω when interpreting this trace formula.
  2. [Sec. 3] The entries in the D-tables are presented without computation details. For at least one non-Abelian example, a short explanation of how n_ω(a) and n_A(a) are obtained from the decompositions would help readers verify the arithmetic and understand the saturation condition mentioned at the end of Sec. 3.3.
  3. [Sec. 3.2, Eq. (3.4)] The notation 'eimj' for the simple objects of Z(Rep(Z4)) is difficult to parse; a more standard notation such as (η^j, χ_i) would improve readability. The same applies to the table headers that use abbreviations like 'toric code' without defining the post-condensation MTCs.
  4. [References] Reference [47] contains a duplicated 'arXiv:' prefix ('arXiv:arXiv:2509.16311'); this should be corrected.
  5. [Sec. 2.3, Eq. (2.8)] In the derivation of the bound, the manuscript attributes n_ω(a)≤ d_a to (A.9c), but (A.9c) actually states the sharper bound n_a≤⌊d_a⌋-1 for non-integral d_a. The weaker inequality used in (2.8) is nevertheless true, so the conclusion is unaffected, but the attribution should be made precise.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular derivation: Eq. (2.8) follows from an external coefficient bound, not from the target inequality; the paper's self-citations are framing only. The unproved maximally-mixed assumption in §2.3 is a correctness gap, not circularity.

full rationale

Walking the derivation chain in §2.3, the entropic order parameter is defined as S(ω||ω∘E), and the claimed bound (2.8) follows from (i) the asserted equality S=log D with D=Σ_a n_ω(a)n_A(a), and (ii) the external constraint n_ω(a)≤d_a quoted from ref. [74]. The target inequality S≤log d_A is not assumed; the only input connecting D to d_A is the coefficient bound from [74], which is not by the present author. The central derivation is therefore independent of the author's previous bound in [33]. The self-citations [33,40] appear in the introduction as context for the entropic order parameter concept and for identifying d_A with the Watatani index; the proof of (2.8) does not rely on those papers, so the self-citations are not load-bearing. Two passages merit flagging as correctness risks rather than circularity: the assertion in §2.3 that E maps every genuinely local operator in A to the identity in M, from which ρ_{ω∘E}=D^{-1}1 and S=log D are concluded, is not derived from the bimodule property (1.1) or the Watatani-index data; and footnote 10 admits an unproved descent assumption needed for the DHR(A)≅C_loc^A identification. These are gaps in support, not reductions of the result to its own inputs: no equation is fitted to the target bound, no parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem from the author's prior work is invoked to forbid alternatives. Under the rubric this is no significant circularity apart from minor, non-load-bearing self-citation, hence a score of 2.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's derivation rests on the main theorem of ref. [1], the unproved descent of the strongly tensor generating object (footnote 10), the asserted maximally mixed form of the lifted state (Section 2.3), the trivial-Witt-class restriction (Section 1), and the standard coefficient bound (A.9c). No free parameters are fitted; the examples use standard MTC data.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption DHR(M) is braided equivalent to the Drinfeld centre of the fusion category defining M (main theorem of ref. [1]).
    Invoked in Section 2.2 to identify the quasi-local algebra M of the fusion spin chain with C; the paper does not repeat the proof.
  • ad hoc to paper A strongly tensor generating object in C_L ⊠_C C_A descends from M in C_L.
    Stated as a belief in footnote 10 of Section 2.2; needed to construct the extended boundary algebra A and DHR(A) ≅ C_loc^A.
  • domain assumption The extended algebra state ω∘E has density matrix ρ_{ω∘E} = D^{-1} diag(1,...,1) on the space of genuinely local operators.
    Core to S=log D in Section 2.3; asserted diagrammatically without proof.
  • domain assumption The MTC C admits a gapped boundary, i.e. is of trivial Witt class.
    Assumed in Section 1 to construct the boundary algebra M; excludes chiral topological orders such as FQHE states.
  • standard math Expansion coefficients of condensable algebras satisfy n_a ≤ d_a (constraint (A.9c) from ref. [74]).
    Used in Eq. (2.8) to bound S ≤ log d_A; taken from the cited literature.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Connecting the tensor-categorical formulation of anyon condensation with operator algebras and entropic order parameters." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AI5NNL3T

@misc{pith2026260812157,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Connecting the tensor-categorical formulation of anyon condensation with operator algebras and entropic order parameters},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AI5NNL3T}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.12157}
}
abstract

Anyon condensation that describes the transition between topological quantum field theories can be formulated in the language of tensor categories or that of operator algebras. We deploy the formalism of Doplicher-Haag-Roberts bimodules over quasi-local $\mathrm{C}^{*}$-algebras recently developed in [1] to investigate anyon condensation, which is associated with an extension of a certain operator algebra. The connection between notions in the two formulations is thereby made manifest in an intuitive, diagrammatic manner. An entropic order parameter, as the quantum information-theoretic measure characterising a condensation, is naturally defined, and we give a very simple proof of a bound on it.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.12157 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) The free A-module functor FA : C → CA with FA(X) = X ⊗A determines what happens when an anyon X from topological order C is brought to the interface described by the module category CA. D, sitting on the other side of this interface, is the post-condensation topological order to be identified below. (b) As A is the invisible topological line (depicted as a dashed line here and simply omitted in the following) on… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) For a strongly tensor generating object [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The bulk line a ∈ Irr(C) can end topologically on the interface CA, and M is a strongly tensor generating object in CL. (a) An operator sits at the junction joining a with the lines M⊗l on the boundary. Oe, obtained when hitting this junction operator with the interface by collapsing the C layer, becomes an element in A upon taking the inductive limit. (b) The action of Oe via OPE. Repeating the arguments we made ab… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

74 extracted references · 68 canonical work pages

  1. [33]

    Information Loss in Generalized Symmetry Breaking

    J. Molina-Vilaplana, G. Sierra, and H.-C. Zhang. Information Loss in Generalized Symmetry Breaking. 2026. [arXiv:2509.24625]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2026

  2. [1]

    C. Jones. DHR bimodules of quasi-local algebras and symmetric quantum cellular automata. Quantum Topol.15 (2024), 633–686

    work page 2024

  3. [2]

    F. A. Bais and J. K. Slingerland.Condensate-induced transitions between topologically ordered phases. Phys. Rev. B79 (2009), 045316

    work page 2009

  4. [3]

    F. J. Burnell.Anyon condensation and its applications. Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 9 (2017), 307–327

    work page 2017

  5. [4]

    S. H. Simon. Topological Quantum. Oxford University Press, 2023

    work page 2023

  6. [5]

    Wen.Colloquium: Zoo of quantum-topological phases of matter

    X.-G. Wen.Colloquium: Zoo of quantum-topological phases of matter. Rev. Mod. Phys. 89 (2017), 041004

    work page 2017

  7. [6]

    Neupert, H

    T. Neupert, H. He, C. von Keyserlingk, G. Sierra, and B. A. Bernevig.Boson conden- sation in topologically ordered quantum liquids. Phys. Rev. B93 (2016), 115103

    work page 2016

  8. [7]

    A. Kitaev. Anyons in an exactly solved model and beyond. Ann. Phys. 321 (2006), 2–111

    work page 2006

Show all 74 references
  1. [8]

    V. G. Turaev.Quantum Invariants of Knots and 3-Manifolds. 3rd. Vol. 18. De Gruyter, Berlin, 2016

    2016

  2. [9]

    V. G. Turaev and A. Virelizier.Monoidal Categories and Topological Field Theory. Vol. 322. Birkhäuser, Cham, 2017

    2017

  3. [10]

    Kong.Anyon condensation and tensor categories

    L. Kong.Anyon condensation and tensor categories. Nucl. Phys. B886 (2014), 436–482

    2014

  4. [11]

    I. S. Eliëns, J. C. Romers, and F. A. Bais.Diagrammatics for Bose condensation in anyon theories. Phys. Rev. B90 (2014), 195130

    2014

  5. [12]

    V. F. R. Jones. Index for subfactors. Invent. Math. 72 (1983), 1–25

    1983

  6. [13]

    Bischoff, Y

    M. Bischoff, Y. Kawahigashi, R. Longo, and K.-H. Rehren. Tensor Categories and Endomorphisms of von Neumann Algebras. Springer Cham, 2015

    2015

  7. [14]

    Q. Chen, R. Hernández Palomares, C. Jones, and D. Penneys.Q-system completion for C∗ 2-categories. J. Funct. Anal.283 (2022), 109524

    2022

  8. [15]

    Q. Chen, R. Hernández Palomares, and C. Jones.K-theoretic classification of inductive limit actions of fusion categories on AF-algebras. Commun. Math. Phys.405 (2024), 83

    2024

  9. [16]

    D. E. Evans and Y. Kawahigashi.Subfactors and mathematical physics. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. (N.S.)60 (2023), 459–482

    2023

  10. [17]

    Kosaki.Extension of Jones’ theory on index to arbitrary factors

    H. Kosaki.Extension of Jones’ theory on index to arbitrary factors. J. Funct. Anal.66 (1986), 123–140

    1986

  11. [18]

    Longo.Index of subfactors and statistics of quantum fields I

    R. Longo.Index of subfactors and statistics of quantum fields I. Commun. Math. Phys. 126 (1989), 217–247

    1989

  12. [19]

    Kosaki and R

    H. Kosaki and R. Longo.A remark on the minimal index of subfactors. J. Funct. Anal. 107 (1992), 458–470

    1992

  13. [20]

    Longo.A duality for Hopf algebras and for subfactors

    R. Longo.A duality for Hopf algebras and for subfactors. I. Commun. Math. Phys. 159 (1994), 133–150

    1994

  14. [21]

    Longo and K.-H

    R. Longo and K.-H. Rehren.Nets of subfactors. Rev. Math. Phys.7 (1995), 567–597

    1995

  15. [22]

    Popa.Classification of subfactors and their endomorphisms

    S. Popa.Classification of subfactors and their endomorphisms. Vol. 86. CBMS Regional Conference Series in Mathematics. American Mathematical Society, 1995. 17

    1995

  16. [23]

    D. E. Evans and Y. Kawahigashi.Quantum symmetries on operator algebras. Oxford Mathematical Monographs. Clarendon Press, 1998

    1998

  17. [24]

    Izumi.The structure of sectors associated with Longo–Rehren inclusions

    M. Izumi.The structure of sectors associated with Longo–Rehren inclusions. I. General theory. Commun. Math. Phys.213 (2000), 127–179

    2000

  18. [25]

    Haag and D

    R. Haag and D. Kastler.An Algebraic Approach to Quantum Field Theory. J. Math. Phys. 5 (1964), 848–861

    1964

  19. [26]

    R. Haag. Local Quantum Physics. Springer, 1996

    1996

  20. [27]

    Doplicher, R

    S. Doplicher, R. Haag, and J. E. Roberts.Fields, observables and gauge transformations I. Commun. Math. Phys.13 (1969), 1–23

    1969

  21. [28]

    Doplicher, R

    S. Doplicher, R. Haag, and J. E. Roberts.Fields, observables and gauge transformations II. Commun. Math. Phys.15 (1969), 173–200

    1969

  22. [29]

    Doplicher, R

    S. Doplicher, R. Haag, and J. E. Roberts.Local observables and particle statistics I. Commun. Math. Phys.23 (1971), 199–230

    1971

  23. [30]

    Doplicher, R

    S. Doplicher, R. Haag, and J. E. Roberts.Local observables and particle statistics II. Commun. Math. Phys.35 (1974), 49–85

    1974

  24. [31]

    Kawahigashi.Two-dimensional topological order and operator algebras

    Y. Kawahigashi.Two-dimensional topological order and operator algebras. Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 35 (2021), 2130003

    2021

  25. [32]

    Vadnerkar.An Operator-Algebraic Framework for Anyons and Defects in Quantum Spin Systems

    S. Vadnerkar.An Operator-Algebraic Framework for Anyons and Defects in Quantum Spin Systems. 2026. [arXiv:2601.05515]

    2026

  26. [34]

    Casini, M

    H. Casini, M. Huerta, J. M. Magán, and D. Pontello.Entanglement entropy and superselection sectors. Part I. Global symmetries. JHEP 02 (2020), 14

    2020

  27. [35]

    J. M. Magan and D. Pontello.Quantum complementarity through entropic certainty principles. Phys. Rev. A103 (2021), 012211

    2021

  28. [36]

    Casini, M

    H. Casini, M. Huerta, J. M. Magán, and D. Pontello.Entropic order parameters for the phases of QFT. JHEP 04 (2021), 277

    2021

  29. [37]

    J. M. Magán.Proof of the universal density of charged states in QFT. JHEP 12 (2021), 100

    2021

  30. [38]

    Molina-Vilaplana, P

    J. Molina-Vilaplana, P. Saura-Bastida, and G. Sierra.Entropic Order Parameters for Categorical Symmetries in 2D-CFT. Entropy 26 (2024), 1064

    2024

  31. [39]

    S. A. Ahmad, M. S. Klinger, and Y. Wang.The many faces of non-invertible symmetries. JHEP 05 (2026), 110

    2026

  32. [40]

    Zhang, G

    H.-C. Zhang, G. Sierra, and J. Molina-Vilaplana. Entropic order parameters and topological holography. JHEP 06 (2026), 83

    2026

  33. [41]

    Marvian and R

    I. Marvian and R. W. Spekkens. Extending Noether’s theorem by quantifying the asymmetry of quantum states. Nat. Commun. 5 (2014), 3821

    2014

  34. [42]

    Capizzi and M

    L. Capizzi and M. Mazzoni.Entanglement asymmetry in the ordered phase of many-body systems: the Ising field theory. JHEP 12 (2023), 144

    2023

  35. [43]

    Fossati, F

    M. Fossati, F. Ares, J. Dubail, and P. Calabrese.Entanglement asymmetry in CFT and its relation to non-topological defects. JHEP 05 (2024), 59

    2024

  36. [44]

    Kusuki, S

    Y. Kusuki, S. Murciano, H. Ooguri, and S. Pal.Entanglement asymmetry and symmetry defects in boundary conformal field theory. JHEP 01 (2025), 57. 18

    2025

  37. [45]

    Fossati, C

    M. Fossati, C. Rylands, and P. Calabrese.Entanglement asymmetry in CFT with boundary symmetry breaking. JHEP 06 (2025), 89

    2025

  38. [46]

    F. Ares, S. Murciano, and P. Calabrese.Entanglement asymmetry as a probe of symmetry breaking. Nat. Commun. 14 (2023), 2036

    2023

  39. [47]

    Benini, P

    F. Benini, P. Calabrese, M. Fossati, A. H. Singh, and M. Venuti.Entanglement Asym- metry for Higher and Noninvertible Symmetries. 2025. [arXiv:arXiv:2509.16311]

    2025

  40. [48]

    A Gaussian asymmetry measure.2026.[arXiv:2604.26878]

    R.TravaglinoandP.Calabrese. A Gaussian asymmetry measure.2026.[arXiv:2604.26878]

    2026 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Vescovo, P

    M. Vescovo, P. Calabrese, and F. Ares.Entanglement asymmetry and quantum Mpemba effect for Kramers-Wannier duality. 2026. [arXiv:2607.21226]

    2026 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Hataishi, D

    L. Hataishi, D. Jaklitsch, C. Jones, and M. Yamashita.On the structure of DHR bimodules of abstract spin chains. 2025. [arXiv:2504.06094]

    2025

  43. [51]

    Ji and X.-G

    W. Ji and X.-G. Wen.Categorical symmetry and noninvertible anomaly in symmetry- breaking and topological phase transitions. Phys. Rev. Res.2 (2020), 033417

    2020

  44. [52]

    L. Kong, T. Lan, X.-G. Wen, Z.-H. Zhang, and H. Zheng.Algebraic higher symmetry and categorical symmetry: A holographic and entanglement view of symmetry. Phys. Rev. Res.2 (2020), 043086

    2020

  45. [53]

    Gaiotto and J

    D. Gaiotto and J. Kulp.Orbifold groupoids. JHEP 02 (2021), 132

    2021

  46. [54]

    I. M. Burbano, J. Kulp, and J. Neuser.Duality defects in E8. JHEP 10 (2022), 186

    2022

  47. [55]

    Chatterjee and X.-G

    A. Chatterjee and X.-G. Wen. Symmetry as a shadow of topological order and a derivation of topological holographic principle. Phys. Rev. B107 (2023), 155136

    2023

  48. [56]

    D. S. Freed, G. W. Moore, and C. Teleman.Topological symmetry in quantum field theory. Quantum Topol.15 (2024), 779–869

    2024

  49. [57]

    Kaidi, K

    J. Kaidi, K. Ohmori, and Y. Zheng.Symmetry TFTs for Non-invertible Defects. Com- mun. Math. Phys.404 (2023), 1021–1124

    2023

  50. [58]

    Kaidi, E

    J. Kaidi, E. Nardoni, G. Zafrir, and Y. Zheng.Symmetry TFTs and anomalies of non-invertible symmetries. JHEP 10 (2023), 53

    2023

  51. [59]

    Bhardwaj and S

    L. Bhardwaj and S. Schäfer-Nameki.Generalized charges, part II: Non-invertible sym- metries and the symmetry TFT. SciPost Phys. 19 (2025), 098

    2025

  52. [60]

    D. E. Evans and C. Jones.An operator algebraic approach to fusion category symmetry on the lattice. 2026. [arXiv:2507.05185]

    2026 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Etingof, S

    P. Etingof, S. Gelaki, D. Nikshych, and V. Ostrik.Tensor Categories. Vol. 205. Mathe- matical Surveys and Monographs. American Mathematical Society, 2015

    2015

  54. [62]

    Jones, P

    C. Jones, P. Naaijkens, D. Penneys, and D. Wallick.Local topological order and boundary algebras. Forum Math. Sigma13 (2025). With an appendix by Masaki Izumi, e135. [arXiv:2307.12552]

    2025 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Schatz.Boundary symmetries of (2+1)D topological orders

    K. Schatz.Boundary symmetries of (2+1)D topological orders. Lett. Math. Phys.115 (2025), 69

    2025

  56. [64]

    Jones, P

    C. Jones, P. Naaijkens, and D. Penneys.Holography for bulk-boundary local topological order. 2026. [arXiv:2506.19969]

    2026 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Davydov, M

    A. Davydov, M. Müger, D. Nikshych, and V. Ostrik.The Witt group of non-degenerate braided fusion categories. J. Reine Angew. Math.2013 (2013), 135–177

    2013

  58. [66]

    Fuchs, C

    J. Fuchs, C. Schweigert, and A. Valentino.Bicategories for boundary conditions and for surface defects in 3-d TFT. Commun. Math. Phys.321 (2013), 543–575. 19

    2013

  59. [67]

    Watatani

    Y. Watatani. Index for C∗-subalgebras. Vol. 83. Mem. Am. Math. Soc. American Mathematical Society, 1990

    1990

  60. [68]

    Fröhlich, J

    J. Fröhlich, J. Fuchs, I. Runkel, and C. Schweigert.Correspondences of ribbon categories. Adv. Math. 199 (2006), 192–329

    2006

  61. [69]

    Bhardwaj, L

    L. Bhardwaj, L. E. Bottini, D. Pajer, and S. Schäfer-Nameki.The club sandwich: Gapless phases and phase transitions with non-invertible symmetries. SciPost Phys. 18 (2025), 156

    2025

  62. [70]

    Bhardwaj, D

    L. Bhardwaj, D. Pajer, S. Schäfer-Nameki, and A. Warman.Hasse diagrams for gapless SPT and SSB phases with non-invertible symmetries. SciPost Phys. 19 (2025), 113

    2025

  63. [71]

    Bhardwaj, Y

    L. Bhardwaj, Y. Gai, S.-J. Huang, K. Inamura, S. Schäfer-Nameki, A. Tiwari, and A. Warman.Gapless phases in (2+1)d with non-invertible symmetries. SciPost Phys. 21 (2026), 019

    2026

  64. [72]

    Dijkgraaf and E

    R. Dijkgraaf and E. Witten.Topological gauge theories and group cohomology. Commun. Math. Phys. 129 (1990), 393–429

    1990

  65. [73]

    Fuchs, I

    J. Fuchs, I. Runkel, and C. Schweigert.TFT construction of RCFT correlators I: partition functions. Nucl. Phys. B646 (2002), 353–497

    2002

  66. [74]

    Chatterjee and X.-G

    A. Chatterjee and X.-G. Wen.Holographic theory for continuous phase transitions: Emergence and symmetry protection of gaplessness. Phys. Rev. B108 (2023), 075105. 20

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.