Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 48 references

Anyonic Excitations in Warped and Curved AdS Backgrounds

T0 review · 5 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read In curved AdS3 backgrounds with conical defects, anyon statistics change by an exponential factor in the angular deficit, suppressing fusion channels and shifting topological entanglement entropy.

desk verdict A clearly labeled phenomenological sketch; the central curvature-deformed S-matrix ansatz is unproven and appears inconsistent with the Verlinde formula, so the paper's predictions do not stand as stated. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.17611 v1 pith:METV4FJW submitted 2025-05-23 hep-th

Tzu-Miao Chou This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-th
keywords Chern-SimonstheoryanyonsmodularS-matrixconicaldefectswarpedAdS3topologicalentanglemententropyS/CFTholographictensornetworks
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 argues that the geometry of warped or conical-defect AdS3 backgrounds changes the quantum statistics of anyons, not just their propagation. The central claim is that the modular S-matrix of SU(N)_k Chern-Simons theory is deformed by multiplication with exp[λ_ab(1−cos δ)], where δ is the angular deficit of a conical singularity and λ_ab measures each fusion channel's curvature sensitivity. Because fusion coefficients are computed from the S-matrix via the Verlinde formula, this deformation suppresses some fusion channels and shifts the topological entanglement entropy. If the claim is right, curvature is not a negligible perturbation for topological quantum computation: anyon braiding phases and fusion outcomes in curved space differ from flat-space predictions by an amount set by δ, with consequences for holographic tensor-network codes.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the curvature-deformed modular S-matrix ansatz S_def_ab(δ) = S_flat_ab exp[λ_ab(1−cos δ)]. The angular deficit δ enters through the holonomy Hol_γ(A) = exp(2π(1−α)J_0) around the conical singularity, and the exponential form is motivated by parallel-transport phase mismatch, a curvature-R Tr(A∧*F) correction to the effective action, and an analogy with Berry phases. The ansatz does the work of converting geometry into topology: once the S-matrix is deformed, the Verlinde formula turns it into suppressed fusion coefficients, the braiding matrices acquire phases κ_ab(1−cos δ), and the topological entanglement entropy shifts through ΔS_00. In the warped AdS3 case, the warping parameter β plays a parallel role by changing the holonomy and hence the same modular quantities.

What would settle it

Compute the Chern-Simons path integral for SU(2)_k on a three-manifold containing a conical defect and extract the modular S-matrix; if the result cannot be written as S_flat_ab exp[λ_ab(1−cos δ)] for any finite λ_ab, the paper's central claim is refuted. A more directly observable test would be an anyon interferometry experiment with a tunable angular deficit, checking whether fusion probabilities follow the predicted 1−cos δ dependence.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central assertion is that a conical defect with deficit angle δ = 2π(1−α) acts on the modular data of the Chern-Simons theory through S_def_ab(δ) = S_flat_ab exp[λ_ab(1−cos δ)] (Eq. 35), with λ_ab a deformation parameter extracted from the Wilson-loop effective action. The same 1−cos δ structure is applied to fusion coefficients, F-symbols, and braiding phases, so the whole modular tensor category of the anyons is geometrically deformed rather than only the S-matrix. Feeding the deformed S-matrix through the Verlinde formula suppresses fusion coefficients, exponentially for larger deficits, and the change in S_00 shifts the topological entanglement entropy by roughly −ΔS00(δ)/S00. The paper applies this to SU(2)_3, SU(3)_2, and SU(4)_1, concluding that higher-rank groups with denser charge spectra are less sensitive to curvature while SU(3)_2 is the most sensitive. It further interprets conical singularities as defect nodes in holographic tensor-network codes, where the deformed fusion and braiding data alter logical encoding and error correction.

Load-bearing premise

The paper assumes, without deriving, that the curvature effect takes the exact exponential form exp[λ_ab(1−cos δ)] (Section 3.3), with λ_ab free parameters said to be fitted to Wilson-loop data that are never shown; if this assumed form is wrong, the claimed curvature corrections have no basis.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Fusion coefficients N^c_ab decrease with the angular deficit δ, with the suppression stronger for SU(2)_3 and weaker for SU(4)_1, so curvature acts as a group-dependent constraint on available fusion channels.
  • Topological entanglement entropy shifts by approximately −ΔS00(δ)/S00, so measuring TEE in a curved or singular background could serve as a detector of the angular deficit.
  • Braiding phases gain a curvature-induced contribution κ_ab(1−cos δ), which would cause anyon-based quantum gates to deviate from their flat-space values in curved backgrounds.
  • Conical singularities in the bulk correspond to defect nodes or punctures in holographic tensor networks, altering how logical qubits are encoded and protected.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the exponential ansatz is correct, the angular deficit behaves like an effective flux: the 1−cos δ dependence is the same signature one expects from a geometric Berry phase, so curvature corrections could be reinterpreted as an Aharonov-Bohm-type phase, a connection the paper leaves implicit.
  • A derivation of λ_ab from the Chern-Simons path integral on a cone would settle whether the effect is real; because the paper treats λ_ab as fitted rather than computed, the strongest next step is to compute them from first principles and check their group and level dependence.
  • The claimed suppression of fusion channels suggests a concrete holographic signature: entanglement wedges around conical defects should show modified quantum dimensions, and tensor-network toy models could be used to simulate whether these modifications improve or degrade error correction.
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

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that in warped or curved AdS3 backgrounds with conical defects, the modular S-matrix of SU(N)_k Chern-Simons theory is deformed as S_def_ab(δ) = S_flat_ab exp[λ_ab(1 − cos δ)] (Eq. 35), and that this deformation suppresses fusion coefficients, modifies braiding phases and topological entanglement entropy, and alters holographic tensor-network codes. The paper reviews flat-space Chern-Simons data, discusses warped AdS3 and conical-defect geometry, proposes curvature-modified effective actions, and presents numerical-looking plots for SU(2)_3, SU(3)_2, and SU(4)_1. The main conclusions rest on the exponential deformation ansatz in Sections 3.3–3.4, supplemented by similar exponential ansätze for F-symbols and R-matrices in Sections 4.2–4.3 and for fusion coefficients in Eq. (47). The numerical results in Figures 2–5 plot these assumed forms rather than independent computations. The manuscript does not derive the deformation from Chern-Simons theory, does not check that the deformed S-matrix yields a valid modular tensor category, and does not provide the fitting data that determine the parameters λ_ab. Internal inconsistencies between the linear and exponential forms of the deformation and between different captions further undermine the central claim.

Significance. If established, a controlled curvature dependence of anyonic fusion and braiding in AdS3 would be significant for topological quantum computation in curved backgrounds and for holographic error-correcting codes. The paper identifies a genuine and interesting question, and it correctly recognizes that the Verlinde formula is the relevant tool for deriving fusion data from modular S-matrices. However, the significance is conditional on a derivation that the manuscript does not supply. The paper contains no machine-checked proofs, no reproducible numerical code, and no independent computation that could validate the proposed ansatz. Its main analytical result, Eq. (35), is introduced as a motivated guess, and the subsequent Verlinde-based conclusions inherit that guess without any consistency check. As it stands, the work is a collection of proposals and heuristic plots rather than a demonstrated result.

major comments (5)
  1. [Section 3.3, Eq. (35)] The central deformation ansatz S_def_ab(δ) = S_flat_ab exp[λ_ab(1 − cos δ)] is asserted, not derived. The three listed motivations (Riemannian parallel transport, curvature terms in an effective action, and Berry-phase analogy) are qualitative analogies; none is a computation from Chern-Simons theory on a conical-defect geometry, and no relation between λ_ab and the Chern-Simons level k, the gauge group, or the deficit angle is given. Since Eq. (35) is the foundation for every subsequent quantitative claim, the absence of a derivation is load-bearing.
  2. [Sections 2.5.1 and 3.3–3.4, Eqs. (17), (35), (47)] The paper uses the Verlinde formula (Eq. 17) to conclude that fusion coefficients shift under the deformed S-matrix, but it never checks the consistency conditions that make the Verlinde formula meaningful. For any genuine modular tensor category, the fusion coefficients N_c_ab must be non-negative integers. A componentwise multiplicative deformation of a valid modular S-matrix generically destroys unitarity and modularity, so the resulting Verlinde coefficients will typically be non-integer or negative. The manuscript does not report any such check. Moreover, the exponential ansatz for fusion coefficients in Eq. (47) is not derived from Eq. (35), and no argument is given that the two deformations are compatible. The claimed curvature suppression of fusion is therefore unsupported.
  3. [Section 3.4 and Figures 2–5] The numerical evidence is not independent of the assumed formulas. Section 3.4 states that the parameters λ_ab are determined by matching Wilson-loop observables in deformed geometries, but no Wilson-loop data, fitting procedure, error bars, or comparison between fit and data are shown. Figure 2 simply plots the exponential form (Eq. 37), and Figures 3–5 plot the exponential ansätze of Eqs. (46) and (47) with chosen constants such as α_SU(2) = 0.5. These figures therefore illustrate the ansatz rather than test it, so they cannot validate the central claim.
  4. [Sections 3.3, 3.4, and 4.5] The manuscript presents incompatible versions of the deformation. Eq. (34) uses a linear form S_flat_ab(1 + γ_ab δ), Eq. (35) uses exp[λ_ab(1 − cos δ)], and Eq. (36) returns to the linear form S_flat_ab(1 + γ_ab δ). No statement reconciles these. In addition, the text around Figure 4 says higher-rank groups such as SU(4)_k exhibit milder suppression, while the caption of Figure 4 says SU(4) shows slightly stronger sensitivity; the caption also attributes the suppression to negative curvature (λ < 0) even though the plotted ansatz in Eq. (47) has positive α_G. These contradictions affect the qualitative conclusions and need to be resolved.
  5. [Sections 2.4.2 and 3.1, Eqs. (14) and (32)] Two further asserted ingredients are not substantiated. The phase shift δθ = (2π/N)(1 − cos(2π/N)) in Eq. (14) is introduced without derivation, and the quantity N ('defect number') is never defined in terms of the deficit angle δ or the conical geometry. Similarly, the curvature-modified effective action in Eq. (32), S_eff = S_CS + ∫√g αR Tr(A ∧ *F), is stated without a gauge-invariance check or an argument that it follows from a controlled limit; adding such a term would break the topological character of the theory, so its effect on modular data cannot simply be assumed.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 2.5.1, Eq. (24)] The claimed fusion rule 4 ⊗ 4 = 1 + 15 for SU(4)_1 is not consistent with the stated list of integrable representations 1, 4, 4̄, 6 at level 1; the representation 15 is not among the level-1 primaries. This example should be corrected or removed.
  2. [Notation throughout] The symbol δ is used for both the angular deficit and a general correction term (e.g., Eq. (18) uses δ as a correction while Eq. (35) uses δ as the deficit), and the parameter α denotes both the curvature coupling in Eq. (32) and the group-dependent coefficient in Eq. (47). Consistent notation would help the reader.
  3. [References] Several references are incomplete or appear mis-attributed: the author list of Ref. [32] is garbled, Refs. [44] and [34] are near-duplicates with different author lists, and Ref. [43] is cited as a numerical analysis but its relevance is not explained in the text.
  4. [Section 3.1, Eq. (32)] If the term ∫√g αR Tr(A ∧ *F) is intended as an effective correction, the paper should at least state the regime in which α is small and the term is a perturbation; otherwise the theory is no longer Chern-Simons and the flat-space modular data cannot be used as the baseline.
  5. [Section 5.2, Eq. (50)] The proposed correction δS_A ∼ λ∫_A (1 − cos δ)dA is presented without derivation and without specifying how the deficit angle varies over the entangling region; this equation should be either derived or identified as a conjecture.

Circularity Check

3 steps flagged · score 8.0 of 10

Central curvature corrections are an assumed exponential ansatz fitted to unseen Wilson-loop data, and the predicted fusion suppression is that same ansatz restated as a conclusion.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 3.3, Eq. (35); Section 3.4, Eq. (37)]
    "To capture the holonomy deviation induced by conical singularities, a curvature-deformed modular S-matrix is introduced as: Sdef_ab(δ) = Sflat_ab · exp [λ_ab(1 − cos δ)] , (35) where λ_ab is a deformation parameter extracted from the Wilson loop effective action in Chern-Simons theory. The fitting parameters λ_ab are determined by matching with known Wilson loop behaviors in deformed geometries (see Figure2)."

    The exponential form is posited, not derived from SU(N)_k Chern-Simons theory or conical-defect geometry. Section 3.4 then says the λ_ab are fixed by matching Wilson-loop observables, but no Wilson-loop data, fitting procedure, or errors are shown. Therefore the 'nonlinear response' plotted in Figure 2 is the assumed exponential with fitted constants; the predicted modular deformation is the fitted input itself, not an independent calculation.

  2. self definitional [Section 4.3, Eq. (47) and Figure 4]
    "For modeling purposes, we adopt the ansatz: N c_ab(δ) = exp[−α_G(1 − cos δ)], (47) where α_G is group-dependent, e.g., α_SU(2)=0.5, α_SU(3)=0.4, α_SU(4)=0.3. All curves exhibit monotonic decay, confirming that curvature reduces the likelihood of successful fusion events."

    The paper never obtains Eq. (47) from Eq. (35) by the Verlinde formula (Eq. 17). It simply writes the desired suppression into the ansatz and then reads the monotonic decay of its own curve as 'confirming' the conclusion. The claim that curvature suppresses fusion is exactly the assumed functional form; additionally, no check shows the deformed S-matrix gives integer, non-negative Verlinde coefficients.

1 more flagged steps
  1. other [Section 5.3, Eq. (51); Section 5.5]
    "For a conical defect with angular deficit δ, the following deformation of the modular S-matrix is proposed: Sdef_ab(δ) = Sflat_ab · exp [λ_ab(1 − cos δ)] , (51) ... In the presence of non-trivial curvature, such as in the case of AdS3, these corrections lead to observable changes in the braiding and fusion statistics of anyons, which can be tested through numerical simulations [43]."

    The same undeveloped exponential is re-stated in the holography section as 'proposed' and then used to assert observable changes in braiding and fusion statistics that 'can be tested through numerical simulations.' Since the simulations (Section 5.5) plot the proposed form and observe its consequences, the holographic conclusion is determined by the ansatz rather than tested against it; the proposed S-deformation serves as both premise and predicted outcome.

full rationale

The circularity here is internal, not citation-based: the references contain no self-citations by the author, so patterns 3–5 do not apply. Rather, the paper's central 'derivation' is an assumed exponential in (1 − cos δ). Section 3.3 introduces Eq. (35) as the curvature-deformed S-matrix with λ_ab 'extracted from the Wilson loop effective action'; Section 3.4 states λ_ab are fitted to unseen Wilson-loop data. The same exponential is then transplanted to F-symbols (Eq. 42), R-matrix phases (Eqs. 44–45), fusion coefficients (Eqs. 46–47), and HEE (Eq. 50), and is restated as 'proposed' in Section 5.3. The claimed conclusions—nonlinear modular response, fusion suppression, TEE shifts, tensor-network implications—are baked into that ansatz; Eq. (47) literally defines fusion coefficients as a decaying exponential and Figure 4's caption reads the decay as confirmation. No Verlinde-formula check ensures the deformed S-matrix yields integer, non-negative fusion coefficients; a componentwise multiplicative deformation generically destroys modular-data integrality. Some peripheral content—flat-space CS equations and standard SU(3)_2 fusion data—is independent, but all novel curvature-dependent claims reduce to the fitted/assumed exponential. Score 8 reflects that the central claim is forced by the ansatz, not that self-citation is involved.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The paper's load-bearing content is the exponential ansatz with fitted parameters λ_ab, γ_ab, α_G, κ_ab, and ξ, none of which are derived. The axioms include the validity of flat-space CS quantization on curved backgrounds and the specific holonomy formula for conical defects. The 'curvature-modified effective action' and the 'deformed braid group' are posited entities with no independent evidence. The paper contributes a parametrized model, not a computation.

free parameters (6)
  • λ_ab = not specified numerically
    Deformation parameters for each fusion channel in Eq. 35, said to be fitted to Wilson-loop data that are not provided.
  • γ_ab = not specified numerically
    Fitting parameters for the linear approximation in Eq. 36, replacing λ_ab in some sections.
  • α_G = α_SU(2)=0.5, α_SU(3)=0.4, α_SU(4)=0.3
    Group-dependent suppression exponents in the fusion coefficient ansatz of Section 4.3, chosen by hand for the plots.
  • κ_ab = not specified numerically
    Curvature-dependent coefficient in the braiding phase angle θ_ab(δ)=κ_ab(1−cos δ) in Eq. 45.
  • ξ^d_abc = not specified numerically
    Deformation parameter for F-symbols in Eq. 42.
  • α curvature coupling = not specified numerically
    Coupling constant in the curvature-modified effective action Eq. 32; no value or derivation given.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Chern-Simons theory on a non-flat manifold can be formulated with the same action and quantized data as flat space, modulo holonomy modifications.
    Used throughout Section 2.2, Eq. 2. The paper assumes the flat-space quantization and modular data remain valid as a baseline for curved backgrounds, which is plausible but not established.
  • ad hoc to paper The modular S-matrix deformation factorizes as S_flat times a scalar function of the angular deficit δ.
    Central ansatz in Eq. 35, Section 3.3. No derivation from the path integral or representation theory.
  • domain assumption The holonomy around a conical defect is Holγ(A)=exp(2π(1−α)J0).
    Eq. 4, Section 2.2. Assumed to encode the deficit angle in the Cartan generator; stated without derivation.
  • ad hoc to paper The phase shift from a conical defect is δθ = (2π/N)(1 − cos(2π/N)).
    Eq. 14, Section 2.4.2. Dimensionally and structurally unexplained; the 'defect number N' is not defined in the usual deficit angle α.
  • domain assumption Hexagon and pentagon identities hold with multiplicative corrections Cδ and Pδ that do not break consistency.
    Section 4.4, Eq. 48. Assumes deformed data still satisfy the coherence conditions, but the corrections are not computed or checked.
invented entities (2)
  • Curvature-corrected braid group B_def_n with holonomy-modified braiding
    purpose: Frame the claim that braiding statistics change in curved backgrounds
    Section 3.2. Introduced as a hypothesis, no explicit construction or mathematical definition given.
  • Curvature-modified effective action term ∫√g αR Tr(A ∧ *F)
    purpose: Provide a Lagrangian basis for the claimed Wilson-loop phase corrections
    Eq. 32, Section 3.1. This term is written down with an arbitrary coupling α and is not derived from any microscopic theory, nor is its effect on anyonic statistics computed.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Anyonic Excitations in Warped and Curved AdS Backgrounds." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/METV4FJW

@misc{pith2026250517611,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Anyonic Excitations in Warped and Curved AdS Backgrounds},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/METV4FJW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.17611}
}
abstract

This work studies anyonic excitations in warped and curved AdS$_3$ backgrounds via Chern-Simons theory. By incorporating geometric deformations such as conical defects, it is shown that curvature modifies the fusion and braiding properties through corrections to modular data in SU($N$)$_k$ models. Analytical models and numerical simulations reveal how these deformations affect the topological structure and influence holographic duals, especially in relation to entanglement and quantum error correction.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.17611 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Representation of Conical Defect with annotated regions. The red dot [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Comparison of the modular matrix deformation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Fusion Process in Flat vs. Curved Backgrounds. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Curvature Correction Effect on Fusion Coefficients for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_4.png]
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Curvature correction effect on the fusion coefficient [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_3.png]
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Curvature correction effect on fusion coefficients for SU(2) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Holographic entanglement entropy for flat and curved backgrounds. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Quantum field theory and the jones polynomial,

    E. Witten, “Quantum field theory and the jones polynomial,” Communi- cations in Mathematical Physics , vol. 121, no. 3, pp. 351–399, 1988. doi: 10.1007/BF01223309

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01223309 1988

  2. [2]

    N = 6 superconformal chern-simons matter theories, m2-branes, and their grav- ity duals,

    O. Aharony, O. Bergman, D. L. Jafferis, and J. M. Maldacena, “N = 6 superconformal chern-simons matter theories, m2-branes, and their grav- ity duals,” JHEP, vol. 2008, no. 10, p. 091, 2008. doi: 10.1088/1126- 6708/2008/10/091

    doi:10.1088/1126- 2008

  3. [3]

    Detecting topological order in a ground state wave function,

    M. Levin and X.-G. Wen, “Detecting topological order in a ground state wave function,” Physical Review Letters, vol. 96, no. 11, p. 110 405, 2006. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.110405

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.96.110405 2006

  4. [4]

    Topological entanglement entropy,

    A. Kitaev and J. Preskill, “Topological entanglement entropy,” Physi- cal Review Letters , vol. 96, no. 11, p. 110 404, 2006. doi: 10 . 1103 / PhysRevLett.96.110404

    work page 2006

  5. [5]

    Theory of the edge states in fractional quantum hall effects,

    X.-G. Wen, “Theory of the edge states in fractional quantum hall effects,” International Journal of Modern Physics B , vol. 6, no. 10, pp. 1711–1762,

    work page

  6. [6]

    A chern-simons effective field theory for the pfaffian quantum hall state,

    E. Fradkin, C. Nayak, A. M. Tsvelik, and F. Wilczek, “A chern-simons effective field theory for the pfaffian quantum hall state,” Nuclear Physics B, vol. 516, no. 3, pp. 704–718, 1998. doi: 10 . 1016 / S0550 - 3213(97 ) 00765-0

    work page 1998

  7. [7]

    Non-abelian anyons and topological quantum computation,

    C. Nayak, S. H. Simon, A. Stern, M. Freedman, and S. Das Sarma, “Non-abelian anyons and topological quantum computation,” Reviews of Modern Physics , vol. 80, no. 3, pp. 1083–1159, 2008. doi: 10.1103/ RevModPhys.80.1083. 26

    work page 2008

  8. [8]

    Classical and quantum conformal field theory,

    G. Moore and N. Seiberg, “Classical and quantum conformal field theory,” Communications in Mathematical Physics , vol. 123, no. 2, pp. 177–254,

Show all 48 references
  1. [9]

    Gauge theories, vertex models, and quantum groups,

    E. Witten, “Gauge theories, vertex models, and quantum groups,” Nu- clear Physics B , vol. 330, no. 2, pp. 285–346, 1990. doi: 10.1016/0550- 3213(90)90325-V

    1990 doi

  2. [10]

    Warped ads 3 gravity,

    S. Detournay, “Warped ads 3 gravity,” Lecture Notes in Physics , vol. 892, pp. 49–92, 2015

    2015

  3. [11]

    Warped ads3/dipole-cft dual- ity,

    A. Castro, W. Song, and A. Strominger, “Warped ads3/dipole-cft dual- ity,” Journal of High Energy Physics , vol. 2011, no. 10, p. 114, 2011. doi: 10.1007/JHEP10(2011)114. arXiv: 1107.3987 [hep-th]

    2011 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Warped ads3 black holes and holog- raphy,

    W. Song, A. Strominger, and J. Xu, “Warped ads3 black holes and holog- raphy,” Journal of High Energy Physics , vol. 2011, no. 5, p. 034, 2011. doi: 10.1007/JHEP05(2011)034. arXiv: 1101.5397 [hep-th]

    2011 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Eternal black holes in anti-de sitter,

    J. Maldacena, “Eternal black holes in anti-de sitter,” Journal of High Energy Physics , vol. 2003, no. 04, p. 021, 2003. doi: 10 . 1088 / 1126 - 6708/2003/04/021. arXiv: hep-th/0106112 [hep-th]

    2003 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Quantum gravity partition functions in three dimensions,

    A. Maloney and E. Witten, “Quantum gravity partition functions in three dimensions,” Journal of High Energy Physics, vol. 2010, no. 2, p. 029, 2010. doi: 10.1007/JHEP02(2010)029. arXiv: 0712.0155 [hep-th]

    2010 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Fusion rules and modular transformations in 2d conformal field theory,

    E. P. Verlinde, “Fusion rules and modular transformations in 2d conformal field theory,” Nuclear Physics B , vol. 300, no. 3, pp. 360–376, 1988. doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(88)90603-7

    1988 doi

  8. [16]

    Holographic derivation of entanglement en- tropy from the ads/cft correspondence,

    S. Ryu and T. Takayanagi, “Holographic derivation of entanglement en- tropy from the ads/cft correspondence,” Physical Review Letters, vol. 96, no. 18, p. 181 602, 2006. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.181602

    2006 doi

  9. [17]

    Three-dimensional einstein gravity: Dynamics of flat space,

    S. Deser, R. Jackiw, and G. ’t Hooft, “Three-dimensional einstein gravity: Dynamics of flat space,” Annals of Physics , vol. 152, pp. 220–235, 1984

    1984

  10. [18]

    Carlip, Quantum Gravity in 2+1 Dimensions

    S. Carlip, Quantum Gravity in 2+1 Dimensions . Cambridge University Press, 1998, isbn: 9780521620703

    1998

  11. [19]

    Characters and modular properties of permutation orbifolds,

    P. Bantay, “Characters and modular properties of permutation orbifolds,” Physics Letters B , vol. 419, no. 1–2, pp. 175–178, 1998

    1998

  12. [20]

    Di Francesco, P

    P. Di Francesco, P. Mathieu, and D. S´ en´ echal,Conformal Field Theory . Springer, 1997

    1997

  13. [21]

    Remarks on the canonical quantization of the chern-simons-witten theory,

    S. Elitzur, G. W. Moore, A. Schwimmer, and N. Seiberg, “Remarks on the canonical quantization of the chern-simons-witten theory,” Nuclear Physics B , vol. 326, pp. 108–134, 1989

    1989

  14. [22]

    Cft, bcft, ade and all that,

    J.-B. Zuber, “Cft, bcft, ade and all that,” hep-th/9412222, 1994

    1994 arXiv

  15. [23]

    C. S. Jens Fuchs, Affine Lie Algebras and Quantum Groups: An Introduc- tion. Cambridge University Press, 1997. 27

    1997

  16. [24]

    Infinite conformal symmetry in two-dimensional quantum field theory,

    A. B. Z. Alexander A. Belavin Alexander M. Polyakov, “Infinite conformal symmetry in two-dimensional quantum field theory,” Nuclear Physics B , vol. 241, no. 2, pp. 333–380, 1984. doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(84)90052-X

    1984 doi

  17. [25]

    The holographic principle in quantum gravity,

    A. Strominger, “The holographic principle in quantum gravity,” Physics Reports, vol. 478, no. 1, pp. 1–69, 2009. doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2009. 01.001

    2009 doi

  18. [26]

    V. G. Turaev, Quantum Invariants of Knots and 3-Manifolds . De Gruyter, 1994

    1994

  19. [27]

    Topological quantum field theory and the braid group,

    T. Mikami, “Topological quantum field theory and the braid group,” Jour- nal of Knot Theory and Its Ramifications , vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 705–725, 2000. doi: 10.1142/S0218216500000611

    doi

  20. [28]

    String theory and noncommutative geometry,

    E. W. Nathan Seiberg, “String theory and noncommutative geometry,” Nuclear Physics B , vol. 536, no. 2, pp. 484–496, 1998. doi: 10 . 1016 / S0550-3213(98)00578-0

    1998

  21. [29]

    The art of geometry,

    H. S. M. Coxeter, “The art of geometry,” Dover Publications, 1965

    1965

  22. [30]

    Entanglement renormalization and holography,

    B. Swingle, “Entanglement renormalization and holography,” Physics Re- view D , vol. 86, no. 6, 2012. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.86.065007

    2012 doi

  23. [31]

    Tensor network states and their path integral representation,

    G. Evenbly and G. Vidal, “Tensor network states and their path integral representation,” Physical Review B , vol. 79, no. 3, p. 201 108, 2009. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.79.201108

    2009 doi

  24. [32]

    Happy code: Holographic tensor networks for topological error correction,

    N. M. T. Andr´ e H. Carvalho Paolo Zanardi, “Happy code: Holographic tensor networks for topological error correction,”Physical Review X, vol. 7, no. 2, p. 021 051, 2017. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevX.7.021051

    2017 doi

  25. [33]

    Tasi lectures on the ads/cft correspondence,

    D. Harlow, “Tasi lectures on the ads/cft correspondence,” Journal of High Energy Physics, vol. 2016, p. 8, 2016. doi: 10.1007/JHEP03(2016)038

    2016 doi

  26. [34]

    Holographic quan- tum error-correcting codes: Toy models for the bulk/boundary correspon- dence,

    F. Pastawski, B. Yoshida, D. Harlow, and J. Preskill, “Holographic quan- tum error-correcting codes: Toy models for the bulk/boundary correspon- dence,” Journal of High Energy Physics , vol. 2015, no. 6, p. 149, 2015. doi: 10.1007/JHEP06(2015)149

    2015 doi

  27. [35]

    Beyond toy models: Distilling tensor networks in ads/cft,

    N. Bao, C. Cao, M. Walter, and Z. Wang, “Beyond toy models: Distilling tensor networks in ads/cft,” Journal of High Energy Physics , vol. 2019, no. 6, p. 190, 2019. doi: 10.1007/JHEP06(2019)190

    2019 doi

  28. [36]

    Nakahara, Geometry, Topology and Physics

    M. Nakahara, Geometry, Topology and Physics . Bristol, UK: Institute of Physics Publishing, 1990

    1990

  29. [37]

    Topological quantum field theory,

    E. Witten, “Topological quantum field theory,” Communications in Math- ematical Physics, vol. 117, no. 3, pp. 353–386, 1988

    1988

  30. [38]

    Topological properties of the fractional quantum hall effect,

    A. E. J. E. Avron, “Topological properties of the fractional quantum hall effect,” Journal of Statistical Physics , vol. 92, no. 5, pp. 477–505, 1988

    1988

  31. [39]

    The large n limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,

    J. Maldacena, “The large n limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. , vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 231–252, 1998. doi: 10.4310/ATMP.1998.v2.n2.a1. eprint: hep-th/9711200. 28

    1998 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Holographic entanglement entropy in the presence of conical defects,

    D. Carmi, D. A. Lopez, T. S. Levi, and A. Shaghoulian, “Holographic entanglement entropy in the presence of conical defects,”JHEP, vol. 2017, no. 6, p. 48, 2017. doi: 10.1007/JHEP06(2017)048. eprint: 1702.01769

    2017 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Categorical aspects of conformal field the- ory,

    J. Fuchs and C. Schweigert, “Categorical aspects of conformal field the- ory,” Advances in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics, vol. 1, pp. 1–65,

  34. [42]

    On the renormalization group flows of the c=1 conformal field theories,

    R. Dijkgraaf, E. Verlinde, and H. Verlinde, “On the renormalization group flows of the c=1 conformal field theories,” Nuclear Physics B , vol. 324, no. 1, pp. 10–40, 1989. doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(89)90066-3

    1989 doi

  35. [43]

    Numerical analysis of modular data deformations in cft with curved backgrounds,

    J. R. Rasmussen and A. W. K. Meibom, “Numerical analysis of modular data deformations in cft with curved backgrounds,” Journal of High En- ergy Physics, vol. 2016, no. 12, p. 123, 2016. doi: 10.1007/JHEP12(2016)

    2016 doi

  36. [44]

    Holographic quan- tum error-correcting codes: Toy models for the bulk/boundary correspon- dence,

    F. Pastawski, B. Yoshida, D. Harlow, and J. I. Cirac, “Holographic quan- tum error-correcting codes: Toy models for the bulk/boundary correspon- dence,” JHEP, vol. 2015, no. 6, p. 149, 2015. doi: 10.1007/JHEP06(2015)

    2015 doi

  37. [45]

    Entanglement renormalization: A quantum group theoretical approach to highly entangled states,

    G. Vidal, “Entanglement renormalization: A quantum group theoretical approach to highly entangled states,” Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 99, no. 22, p. 220 405, 2007. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.220405. eprint: quant- ph/0512136. 29

    2007

  38. [1989]

    doi: 10.1007/BF01238857

    doi

  39. [1992]

    doi: 10.1142/S0217979292000840

    doi

  40. [1997]

    eprint: hep-th/9702033

    arXiv

Pith tools

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