Diagrammatic Categories which arise from Representation Graphs

Ryan Reynolds

REVIEW 4 major objections 3 minor 20 references

Diagrammatic Categories which arise from Representation Graphs

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

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

Pith's one-line read A representation graph of a group determines a diagrammatic category whose quotient is equivalent to the full subcategory of tensor products of irreducible G-modules.

desk verdict The framework is genuinely new and the cyclic case works, but the general faithfulness proof rests on a false basis claim, so the advertised equivalence is not established. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.05005 v1 pith:QYD75YXK submitted 2025-02-07 math.CT math.COmath.RT

Ryan Reynolds This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.CTmath.COmath.RT MSC 18M0520C15

keywords diagrammaticcategoriesrepresentationgraphsmonoidaltensoridealsgrouprepresentationsfusionTemperley-Liebcategory

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 claims that the representation graph of a group—whose nodes are the simple modules and whose edges record which simple modules appear when tensoring with a chosen simple module $V$—carries enough information to build a diagrammatic category. It defines a strict monoidal $\mathbb{C}$-linear category $\mathbf{Dgrams}_{R(V,G)}$ generated by merge and split diagrams along the edges of this graph, and a monoidal functor $H$ sending each diagram to the corresponding $G$-module homomorphism. The main theorem states that if the graph is connected and has no multiple parallel edges, and if a tensor ideal $I$ satisfies condition (4.3), then the induced functor $\mathbf{Dgrams}/I \to G\text{-mod}_{\mathrm{irr}}$ is an equivalence of categories. A sympathetic reader should care because this gives a uniform, graph-theoretic way to present tensor products of irreducibles diagrammatically, extending the classical diagrammatic description of tensor powers of the natural module. The paper also argues that the same format applies to fusion categories, not just group representations.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the representation graph $R(V,G)$ together with the diagrammatic category $\mathbf{Dgrams}_{R(V,G)}$ built from it. Paths in the graph label specific diagrams $d_p$ and $u_p$ that the functor $H$ sends to canonical projections and inclusions between $V^{\otimes n}$ and irreducible summands. The proof's mechanism is to show that these path-labelled diagrams span every hom space (fullness), and then to impose relation (4.3) so that distinct diagrams have distinct images (faithfulness). The relation (4.3) collapses each endomorphism space of a generator to scalar multiples of the identity; Lemma 4.12 uses the path projections as a basis to convert this into faithfulness on all hom spaces.

What would settle it

For the symmetric group $S_3$ with $V$ the two-dimensional irreducible module, the representation graph has three paths of length 2 from $V$ to $V$, but $\operatorname{Hom}_{S_3}(V\otimes V, V)$ is one-dimensional; the proof's Lemma 4.12 requires the three path projections to be a basis, so this example is enough to test that lemma.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 4.15: for a group $G$ and a simple module $V$, let $R(V,G)$ be the representation graph with nodes indexed by simple $G$-modules and an edge from $i$ to $j$ for each copy of $S(j)$ in $V \otimes S(i)$. From this graph one builds the $\mathbb{C}$-linear monoidal category $\mathbf{Dgrams}_{R(V,G)}$ whose morphisms are combinations of identity strands, merge maps, and split maps along adjacent nodes. The functor $H$ sends these generating diagrams to fixed nonzero homomorphisms $\pi_{1,i}^{j}: V\otimes S(i)\to S(j)$ and their adjoints. The theorem asserts that when $R(V,G)$ is connected and multiplicity-free, and $I$ is a tensor ideal satisfying (4.3)—so that endomorphism spaces of single objects become one-dimensional—the induced functor $\mathbf{Dgrams}/I \to G\text{-mod}_{\mathrm{irr}}$ is full, faithful, and essentially surjective, hence an equivalence.

Load-bearing premise

The faithfulness proof assumes that each route through the representation graph from the distinguished module to a fixed simple module produces a linearly independent invariant map; for some groups several routes give the same map, so this can fail.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For every connected multiplicity-free representation graph that admits a tensor ideal satisfying (4.3), the quotient category gives a diagrammatic presentation of the monoidal subcategory generated by the irreducibles.
The construction recovers the classical non-crossing diagram category as the special case of tensor powers of the natural module, so it places that example in a general framework.
The same recipe works for fusion categories: starting from a fusion graph, one obtains a diagrammatic category equivalent to the fusion category, as illustrated by the Verlinde and Fibonacci examples in the paper.
The problem of finding a diagrammatic presentation is reduced to finding a tensor ideal $I$ satisfying (4.3), which the paper notes must be determined case by case.
Because the representation graph is allowed to be infinite, the result covers infinite families of groups, not just finite ones.

Reading between the lines

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

The proof's reliance on path-labelled projections forming a basis suggests a testable criterion: the equivalence should hold precisely for graphs where those projections are linearly independent, so checking this condition could certify or refute diagrammatic presentations for new groups.
A natural extension is to quantum groups at roots of unity and other tensor categories with known fusion graphs; the relations in $I$ would then be computed from the fusion rules rather than from group characters.
When path-labelled projections are dependent, one could add those linear dependencies as extra relations in $I$; this may salvage an equivalence and extend the construction to groups whose representation graphs have multiple parallel edges.
The paper leaves $I$ abstract; identifying $I$ with the kernel of $H$ in concrete examples, such as the binary tetrahedral group, would produce explicit diagrammatic relations for its affine Dynkin graph.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Two things to know upfront. First, the construction of a diagrammatic category from an arbitrary multiplicity-free McKay quiver is a real extension of the Temperley–Lieb and McKay centralizer algebra settings; that part is worth taking seriously. Second, the main equivalence theorem is not proven. Lemma 4.12's basis claim is false, and the gap is load-bearing.

What is new and good: the paper moves from endomorphism algebras to full diagrammatic categories generated by all irreducibles. The fullness theorem, Theorem 4.11, is proved under reasonable hypotheses. The cyclic group section is self-contained and works: all Hom spaces are 0- or 1-dimensional, so faithfulness reduces to showing there is only one diagram up to scaling. The examples—binary tetrahedral, PSL(2,8), Verlinde, Fibonacci—are useful illustrations of the intended scope.

The problem is in the general case. Lemma 4.12 asserts that path-indexed projections form a basis of Hom_G(V^{⊗n}, S(F)). They do not in general. For G=S_3 with V the two-dimensional irreducible module, there are three length-2 paths from V to V, but V⊗V ≅ trivial ⊕ sign ⊕ V, so Hom_{S_3}(V⊗V, V) is one-dimensional. The three projections are linearly dependent, not a basis. The proof uses that basis claim to conclude the corresponding diagrams are linearly independent, and without that step the faithfulness argument in Theorem 4.14 collapses. Condition (4.3) does not by itself impose the needed relations; it only fixes endomorphism spaces. Section 5 asserts an explicit quotient but says only that the proofs are analogous, with no proof supplied. Theorem 4.15 is therefore conditional on an ideal I whose existence is not established.

To be fair, the abstract does oversell the result. The general equivalence is more a program than a theorem at this point. But the paper is not incoherent: the framework is natural, the cyclic case is solid, and the examples show the intended reach.

The audience is researchers in diagrammatic categorification and representation theory who might use this as a starting point for presentations of tensor subcategories over McKay quivers. It deserves a serious referee—the construction is new enough and the concrete cases are instructive enough that a referee can identify what needs repair. As it stands, I would not cite the main equivalence theorem, but I would want to see a revised version.

Referee Report

4 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a general framework for constructing diagrammatic monoidal categories from the representation graph (McKay quiver) R(V,G) of a group G and a simple G-module V. The main theorem (Theorem 4.15) claims that, when R(V,G) is connected with no multiple parallel edges and I is a tensor ideal satisfying condition (4.3), the quotient Dgrams/I is equivalent to the full monoidal subcategory G-modirr generated by the irreducible G-modules. A special case for cyclic groups is developed in Section 3, and Section 5 sketches an explicit quotient construction and several examples, including PSL(2,8), the universal Verlinde category, and the Fibonacci category.

Significance. If the main theorem were correct, the framework would give a uniform way to present diagrammatic categories for monoidal subcategories generated by irreducibles, with potential applications to McKay correspondence and fusion categories. The cyclic-group example in Section 3 is a useful worked case, and the idea of indexing diagrammatic generators by paths in the representation graph is natural. However, the central claim is not established: the faithfulness proof rests on a false basis assertion, and the quotient ideal I is never explicitly constructed for the general case. The advertised general equivalence therefore does not follow from the arguments given.

major comments (4)

[4.4, Lemma 4.12] The proof asserts that the set of path-indexed projections {π_p} indexed by paths p ∈ P(1,F)_n 'forms a basis for Hom_G((A(1))^{⊗n}, A(F))' and justifies this by the fullness of H. Fullness only provides spanning, not linear independence, and the assertion is false in general. For G = S_3 and V the standard two-dimensional irreducible module, the representation graph has three length-2 paths from V to V, namely (V,V,V), (V,1,V), and (V,sgn,V), but V⊗V ≅ 1 ⊕ sgn ⊕ V, so Hom_{S_3}(V⊗V,V) is one-dimensional. The three path-indexed projections are linearly dependent, so the corresponding diagrams d_p cannot be concluded to be linearly independent. Since the faithfulness argument in Theorem 4.14 and hence the equivalence in Theorem 4.15 depend on this lemma, the central claim is not established.
[4.4, Theorem 4.15] Theorem 4.15 is conditional on an unspecified tensor ideal I satisfying (4.3). The author acknowledges this immediately after the theorem with the statement 'it remains to determine I... case-by-case.' Thus the paper does not provide an explicit quotient for the general construction; it only proves a conditional implication, assuming both the existence of such an ideal and the validity of the preceding faithfulness proof. This falls short of the abstract's promise of 'explicit criteria' for an equivalence.
[4.4, condition (4.3)] Condition (4.3) only constrains Hom spaces between simple objects, namely Hom_Dgrams/I(E,F), whereas the faithfulness proof needs control of Hom_Dgrams/I(1^{⊗n}, F). In the S_3 example, H annihilates a nontrivial linear combination of diagrams in Hom(1^{⊗2}, V) because the corresponding module maps are linearly dependent. Condition (4.3) does not by itself force that linear combination into I. Hence, even if one could find an ideal satisfying (4.3), the proof provides no mechanism to make H faithful on the non-simple Hom spaces where the problematic dependence occurs.
[5] The explicit quotient construction in Section 5 is asserted without proof. The text states 'The proofs are analogous to show H is a full functor' and 'The proofs are analogous to show this construction admits of a fully faithful functor,' but no complete proof is supplied. Given that the earlier faithfulness proof (Lemma 4.12) is invalid, the omitted argument cannot be considered routine; the relations listed in Section 5 do not address the S_3 counterexample and the manuscript does not demonstrate that the induced functor is faithful.

minor comments (3)

[4.3, Lemma 4.10] In the proof of Lemma 4.10, the displayed completeness identity Σ_{p∈P(1,F)_n} ι_p∘π_p = id_{A(1)^{⊗n}} is false as written; the sum must be taken over all irreducible summands F, not over paths to a fixed F. The surrounding prose indicates the author is aware of this, but the displayed formula should be corrected.
[4.1, after (4.1)] The claim that for each irreducible G-module A(F) the minimal n_F with A(F) ⊂ (A(1))^{⊗n_F} corresponds to a single path is not justified by the absence of multiple parallel edges; a connected graph can have several distinct paths of the same minimal length. The construction only needs a choice of one such path, so the statement should be rephrased.
[4.2, Definition 4.4] The scalar normalizations of the maps m^F_{1,E} and the corresponding splits are chosen arbitrarily, and the paper does not state whether the asserted faithfulness or the linear independence of the diagrams d_p is independent of these choices. Since the counterexample to Lemma 4.12 shows that linear dependence can occur, the dependence on these scalars should be discussed explicitly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the construction is a conditional presentation theorem; the fatal flaw is an unproven (and false) basis lemma, which is a correctness gap, not a self-referential reduction.

full rationale

The paper does not fit its own conclusions into its hypotheses. Dgrams is freely generated from graph path data, and the functor H is defined by sending generators to fixed homomorphisms in G-mod; relations (4.2) are exactly the completeness relations (4.1), so H is well defined. This is the normal situation for a diagrammatic presentation and does not make the claimed equivalence true by construction: fullness and faithfulness still require proof. Condition (4.3), requiring Hom_Dgrams(E,F) = C·delta, is a necessary condition for equivalence, but the paper does not define I as ker H or as an ideal that literally forces all Hom spaces to match the target; it states the ideal must be determined case by case (Section 5). The proof of faithfulness in Lemma 4.12 relies on the assertion that the path-indexed maps {pi_p} form a basis of Hom_G(V^⊗n, S(F)). That assertion is not a restatement of the theorem's conclusion; it is an external representation-theoretic fact, and it is false in general (e.g., G=S_3, V the 2-dimensional irreducible: three length-2 paths from V to V exist, but Hom_G(V⊗V,V) is one-dimensional). A false lemma is a correctness problem, not circularity. There are no load-bearing self-citations: the cited works (McKay, Barnes–Benkart–Halverson, Westbury, etc.) are external and used for background. The admitted gaps—'it remains to determine I' and 'the proofs are analogous'—are incompleteness, not input/output equivalence. The derivation chain therefore does not reduce to its own inputs; it simply fails at an unproved step.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central construction rests on the multiplicity-free and connectedness assumptions, plus an unproven basis property of path maps. The quotient condition (4.3) is assumed rather than derived from the representation theory, and the scalar normalizations of the maps remain free.

free parameters (2)

Scalars c_E in the quotient condition (4.3) = unspecified complex numbers
The ideal I is only required to make Hom(E,F) equal to δ_{E,F} C·id_E; the constants c_E are free and are never determined, so the quotient category depends on them.
Scalar normalizations of the maps m^F_{1,E} = chosen up to nonzero scalars
For each edge of the representation graph the paper fixes a map in a one-dimensional Hom space; the p maps are then forced by (4.1), but the actual normalized maps are arbitrary, so the functor H is only defined up to gauge choices.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption The category of finite-dimensional G-modules is semisimple and Schur's lemma applies
Used throughout Section 4, for example before Definition 4.1 and in the construction of the maps m and p.
domain assumption The representation graph R(V,G) is connected and has no multiple parallel edges
Stated at the start of Section 4.1; this multiplicity-free condition makes the chosen module maps canonical up to scalar.
ad hoc to paper There exists a tensor ideal I satisfying condition (4.3)
Theorem 4.15 requires such an ideal, but the paper does not prove its existence in general and says determining I must be done case by case.
ad hoc to paper The canonical path projections {π_p} indexed by paths form a basis of Hom_G(V^{⊗n}, S(F))
Assumed in the proof of Lemma 4.12 and unproven; it is false for S_3 with V the two-dimensional module, where three paths exist but the Hom space is one-dimensional.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Diagrammatic Categories which arise from Representation Graphs." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QYD75YXK

@misc{pith2026250205005,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Diagrammatic Categories which arise from Representation Graphs},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QYD75YXK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.05005}
}

abstract

The main result of this paper utilizes the representation graph of a group $G$, $R(V,G)$, and gives a general construction of a diagrammatic category $\mathbf{Dgrams}_{R(V,G)}$. The proof of the main theorem shows that, given explicit criteria, there is an equivalence of categories between a quotient category of $\mathbf{Dgrams}_{R(V,G)}$ and a full subcategory of $G-\textbf{mod}$ with objects being the tensor products of finitely many irreducible $G$-modules.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

20 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages

[1]

Furthermore, for /u1D44E, /u1D44F∈ /u1D43C/u1D43A, we will also use /u1D44F→ /u1D44Eto denote that /u1D44Fis adjacent to /u1D44Ein /u1D445(/u1D449, /u1D43A)

In particular, we will use /u1D449and /u1D43A(1) interchangeably. Furthermore, for /u1D44E, /u1D44F∈ /u1D43C/u1D43A, we will also use /u1D44F→ /u1D44Eto denote that /u1D44Fis adjacent to /u1D44Ein /u1D445(/u1D449, /u1D43A). Note that in an undirected graph /u1D44F→ /u1D44E implies /u1D44E→ /u1D44F. Deﬁnition 4.1. We let/u1D43A-modirr be the full monoidal ...

work page
[2]

Temperley and Elliot H Lieb

H.N.V . Temperley and Elliot H Lieb. Relations between th e ’percolation’ and ’colouring’ problem and other graph-theoretical problems associated with regular plana r lattices: some exact results for the ’percolation’ prob- lem’percolation’ problem. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences , 322(1549):251–280, 1971

work page 1971
[3]

We will again use the convention that the empty diagram is the morphism from (0) to (0) which represents multiplication by 1 where (0) = ¯0 is the identity object

C/a.pc/t.pc/e.pc/g.pc/o.pc/r.pc/i.pc/e.pc/s.pc /w.pc/i.pc/t.pc/h.pc I/r.pc/r.pc/e.pc/d.pc/u.pc/c.pc/i.pc/b.pc/l.pc/e.pcC/u1D45B-/m.pc/o.pc/d.pc/u.pc/l.pc/e.pc/s.pc /a.pc/s.pc O/b.pc/j.pc/e.pc/c.pc/t.pc/s.pc Let us explore some new families of categories. We will again use the convention that the empty diagram is the morphism from (0) to (0) which represen...

work page
[4]

For example, let Γ be the representation graph of one of the ﬁnite subgroups of /u1D446/u1D448(2) as discussed in 2

T/h.pc/e.pc C/a.pc/t.pc/e.pc/g.pc/o.pc/r.pc/i.pc/e.pc/s.pc/u1D43A-/m.pc/o.pc/d.pc/i.pc/r.pc/r.pc/a.pc/n.pc/d.pcDgrams/u1D445 (/u1D449 ,/u1D43A) Let Γ be a directed graph with no multiple parallel edges, that is, no two nodes have two or more directed edges with the same direction between them, an d with the set of vertices indexed by the set /u1D43CΓ. For...

work page
[5]

F/i.pc/n.pc/a.pc/l.pc R/e.pc/m.pc/a.pc/r.pc/k.pc/s.pc It is worth noting that we can be even more general in our set up with much the same result. Suppose instead that we begin with a semi-simple, monoidal, C-linear category M and restrict to the full subcategory monoidally generated by the simple obj ects, which we can denote as Mirr, the objects of whic...

work page
[6]

Shorter notes: Cartan matrices, ﬁnite groups of quat ernions, and Kleinian singularities

John McKay. Shorter notes: Cartan matrices, ﬁnite groups of quat ernions, and Kleinian singularities. Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society , 81(1):153–154, 1981

work page 1981
[7]

Barnes, Georgia Benkart, and Tom Halverson

Jeﬀrey M. Barnes, Georgia Benkart, and Tom Halverson. Mc Kay centralizer algebras. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, 112(2):375–414, 2016

work page 2016
[8]

Quantum invariants of knots and 3-mani folds

Vladimir Turaev. Quantum invariants of knots and 3-mani folds. De Gruyter, Berlin, 2nd edition, 1994

work page 1994

Show all 20 references

[9]

The Temperley-Lieb categories and skein mo dules

Joshua Chen. The Temperley-Lieb categories and skein mo dules. arXiv:1502.06845[math.QA], 2014

2014 arXiv
[10]

Sam and Andrew Snowden

Steven V . Sam and Andrew Snowden. The representation the ory of Brauer categories I: Triangular categories. arXiv:2006.04328[math.RT], 2020

2006 arXiv
[11]

A new approach to the rep resentation theory of the partition category

Jonathan Brundan and Max Vargas. A new approach to the rep resentation theory of the partition category. arXiv:2107.05099[math.RT], 2021

2021 arXiv
[12]

Etingof, S

P. Etingof, S. Gelaki, D. Nikshych, and V . Ostrik. Tensor Categories. Mathematical Surveys and Monographs. American Mathematical Society, 2016

2016
[13]

Lane, S.J

S.M. Lane, S.J. Axler, Springer-Verlag (Nowy Jork)., F. W. Gehring, and P.R. Halmos. Categories for the Working Mathematician. Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer, 1998

1998
[14]

B. W. Westbury. The representation theory of the Temperley-Lieb algebras. Mathematische Zeitschrift, 219(1):539– 569, 1995

1995
[15]

Mckay tree s, 2021

Avraham Aizenbud and Inna Entova-Aizenbud. Mckay tree s, 2021

2021
[16]

Evans and Mathew Pugh

David E. Evans and Mathew Pugh. Spectral measures for g2, ii: Finite subgroups. Reviews in Mathematical Physics, 32(08):2050026, 2020

2020
[17]

On a /u1D45E-analogue of the McKay correspondence and the /u1D434/u1D437/u1D438classiﬁcation of ˆ/u1D460/u1D4592 conformal ﬁeld theories

Alexander Kirillov and Viktor Ostrik. On a /u1D45E-analogue of the McKay correspondence and the /u1D434/u1D437/u1D438classiﬁcation of ˆ/u1D460/u1D4592 conformal ﬁeld theories. Advances in Mathematics, 171(2):183–227, 2002

2002
[18]

McKay graphs

Dane Frenette. McKay graphs. PhD thesis, Library and Archives Canada = Biblioth `eque et Archives Canada, Ottawa, 2010

2010
[19]

On symmetric fusion categories in posit ive characteristic

Viktor Ostrik. On symmetric fusion categories in posit ive characteristic. Selecta Mathematica, 26:36, 2020

2020
[20]

Commutative algebra s in ﬁbonacci categories

Thomas Booker and Alexei Davydov. Commutative algebra s in ﬁbonacci categories. Journal of Algebra , 355(1):176–204, 2012

2012

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Furthermore, for /u1D44E, /u1D44F∈ /u1D43C/u1D43A, we will also use /u1D44F→ /u1D44Eto denote that /u1D44Fis adjacent to /u1D44Ein /u1D445(/u1D449, /u1D43A)

In particular, we will use /u1D449and /u1D43A(1) interchangeably. Furthermore, for /u1D44E, /u1D44F∈ /u1D43C/u1D43A, we will also use /u1D44F→ /u1D44Eto denote that /u1D44Fis adjacent to /u1D44Ein /u1D445(/u1D449, /u1D43A). Note that in an undirected graph /u1D44F→ /u1D44E implies /u1D44E→ /u1D44F. Deﬁnition 4.1. We let/u1D43A-modirr be the full monoidal ...

work page

[2] [2]

Temperley and Elliot H Lieb

H.N.V . Temperley and Elliot H Lieb. Relations between th e ’percolation’ and ’colouring’ problem and other graph-theoretical problems associated with regular plana r lattices: some exact results for the ’percolation’ prob- lem’percolation’ problem. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences , 322(1549):251–280, 1971

work page 1971

[3] [3]

We will again use the convention that the empty diagram is the morphism from (0) to (0) which represents multiplication by 1 where (0) = ¯0 is the identity object

C/a.pc/t.pc/e.pc/g.pc/o.pc/r.pc/i.pc/e.pc/s.pc /w.pc/i.pc/t.pc/h.pc I/r.pc/r.pc/e.pc/d.pc/u.pc/c.pc/i.pc/b.pc/l.pc/e.pcC/u1D45B-/m.pc/o.pc/d.pc/u.pc/l.pc/e.pc/s.pc /a.pc/s.pc O/b.pc/j.pc/e.pc/c.pc/t.pc/s.pc Let us explore some new families of categories. We will again use the convention that the empty diagram is the morphism from (0) to (0) which represen...

work page

[4] [4]

For example, let Γ be the representation graph of one of the ﬁnite subgroups of /u1D446/u1D448(2) as discussed in 2

T/h.pc/e.pc C/a.pc/t.pc/e.pc/g.pc/o.pc/r.pc/i.pc/e.pc/s.pc/u1D43A-/m.pc/o.pc/d.pc/i.pc/r.pc/r.pc/a.pc/n.pc/d.pcDgrams/u1D445 (/u1D449 ,/u1D43A) Let Γ be a directed graph with no multiple parallel edges, that is, no two nodes have two or more directed edges with the same direction between them, an d with the set of vertices indexed by the set /u1D43CΓ. For...

work page

[5] [5]

F/i.pc/n.pc/a.pc/l.pc R/e.pc/m.pc/a.pc/r.pc/k.pc/s.pc It is worth noting that we can be even more general in our set up with much the same result. Suppose instead that we begin with a semi-simple, monoidal, C-linear category M and restrict to the full subcategory monoidally generated by the simple obj ects, which we can denote as Mirr, the objects of whic...

work page

[6] [6]

Shorter notes: Cartan matrices, ﬁnite groups of quat ernions, and Kleinian singularities

John McKay. Shorter notes: Cartan matrices, ﬁnite groups of quat ernions, and Kleinian singularities. Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society , 81(1):153–154, 1981

work page 1981

[7] [7]

Barnes, Georgia Benkart, and Tom Halverson

Jeﬀrey M. Barnes, Georgia Benkart, and Tom Halverson. Mc Kay centralizer algebras. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, 112(2):375–414, 2016

work page 2016

[8] [8]

Quantum invariants of knots and 3-mani folds

Vladimir Turaev. Quantum invariants of knots and 3-mani folds. De Gruyter, Berlin, 2nd edition, 1994

work page 1994