Axion QED as a Lattice Gauge Theory and Non-Invertible Symmetry

Hiroshi Suzuki; Soma Onoda; Yamato Honda

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 28 references

Axion QED as a Lattice Gauge Theory and Non-Invertible Symmetry

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper constructs a gauge-invariant 't Hooft loop operator for lattice axion QED and computes how the non-invertible chiral symmetry annihilates it or dresses it with a photon field-strength surface.

desk verdict A plausible lattice construction of axion QED whose central gauge-invariance claim is asserted rather than shown; the response computation may not be valid until the dressing fields are checked. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.08142 v2 pith:RV36KA4Z submitted 2024-12-11 hep-lat

Yamato Honda , Soma Onoda , Hiroshi Suzuki This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-lat MSC 81T2581T1381T50 PACS 11.15.Ha11.30.Rd14.80.Va

keywords axionQEDnon-invertiblesymmetrymodifiedVillainformulation'tHooftlooplatticegaugetheorychiralBFgeneralized

topics Yang-Mills Mass Gap

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

In axion QED, the axion-photon coupling spoils the gauge invariance of magnetic defects such as 't Hooft loops because the Bianchi identity for the photon is violated exactly where the defect sits. This paper builds a lattice version of axion QED in the modified Villain formulation, shows explicitly where gauge invariance fails, and restores it for the 't Hooft loop by adding new degrees of freedom localized on the loop, producing a genuine gauge-invariant loop operator. It then applies the lattice non-invertible chiral symmetry operator from Ref. [1] and computes the response without half-space gauging: loops whose magnetic charge is not in $N\mathbb{Z}$ and that are non-contractible modulo $N$ are annihilated, while all other loops acquire a surface of the photon field strength. If the construction is correct, this gives a fully local, lattice-regularized derivation of the non-invertible Gauss law for axions and makes the 't Hooft loop a well-defined observable for further study.

What carries the argument

The carrying machinery is the modified Villain lattice formulation of $U(1)$ gauge theory, in which the photon and axion are represented by $\mathbb{R}$-valued cochains with Villain fields and $\mathbb{Z}$ gauge symmetries, so that magnetic defects appear as violations of Bianchi identities at specific locations. Gauge invariance of the refined axion-photon coupling is restored by assigning compensating transformations to the Lagrange multiplier fields, and the genuine 't Hooft loop is built by adding loop-localized fields $\phi$, $b$, $\rho$; their gauge-invariant combinations appear in the dressing of Eq. (26). The non-invertible symmetry operator (28) contains a lattice BF partition function on a three-manifold whose mod-$N$ twisting is what produces either the vanishing of the loop or the attached field-strength surface in Eqs. (32)--(34).

What would settle it

Compute the continuum limit of correlation functions of the dressed operator (26) and test whether they are independent of the auxiliary parameters $\mu_\phi$, $\mu_\rho$ and of the chosen local completion; if they depend on these choices, or if they do not reduce to the naive 't Hooft loop when the axion-photon coupling is turned off, then Eqs. (32)--(34) describe the response of some other defect.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the 't Hooft loop dressed with auxiliary fields $\phi$, $b$, $\rho$ that live only on the loop, with the gauge transformations of Eqs. (21)--(23), is gauge-invariant, and that the non-invertible chiral symmetry operator (28) acts on it as in Eqs. (32)--(34): it annihilates the loop when the magnetic charge $e$ is not in $N\mathbb{Z}$ and the loop is non-contractible modulo $N$, and otherwise multiplies the loop by a surface operator $\exp( i p e q^2 \sum_R F / N )$. When $e$ is a multiple of $N$, the attached surface can be rewritten as a Wilson loop around the loop, which the paper argues is not a physically meaningful contribution for the dressed operator. The computation uses lattice BF partition functions and local Villain variables rather than the standard half-space gauging, and the results are stated to be consistent with the continuum non-invertible Gauss law for axions.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the loop-localized fields added to restore gauge invariance do not change the physical content of the 't Hooft loop, and the paper itself notes that the restoration method is not unique, so a different local completion could define a different operator in the continuum limit.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The 't Hooft loop becomes a gauge-invariant observable in lattice axion QED, allowing its expectation values and correlation functions to be studied in a regulated setting.
The non-invertible chiral transformation is fully characterized on these loops: it annihilates them precisely when the magnetic charge is not divisible by $N$ and the loop winds nontrivially modulo $N$, and otherwise attaches a photon field-strength surface.
When the magnetic charge is a multiple of $N$, the attached surface collapses to a Wilson loop around the loop, although the paper argues this Wilson-loop piece is not physical for the dressed operator.
Because every ingredient is a local lattice variable, the construction realizes the continuum non-invertible Gauss law for axions without half-space gauging, which is the standard continuum method.

Reading between the lines

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

A testable extension left implicit in the paper: because the loop-localized dressing is non-unique, different choices of $\mu_\phi$ and $\mu_\rho$ should be checked for whether their continuum limits agree, since only then is the operator (26) the physical 't Hooft loop.
The same restoration mechanism should carry over to axion strings, which the paper notes are also gauge-noninvariant; constructing a dressed string operator and computing its response would complete the magnetic-object picture.
On a finite lattice with nontrivial cycles, the modulo-$N$ contractibility condition in Eq. (32) is directly checkable, so the annihilation of non-invertibly charged loops is a concrete target for numerical simulation.
The lattice BF partition function used in the symmetry operator is a general gadget, suggesting the same method can define non-invertible symmetry actions in other four-dimensional theories whose chiral rotation is obstructed by a similar anomaly.

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

Dear colleague,

This is a short proceedings note on lattice axion QED in the modified Villain formulation. The new elements are a gauge-invariant lattice action with the axion-photon coupling (Eq. 13) and a dressed 't Hooft loop (Eq. 26) built from extra fields localized on the loop, followed by a computation of how the non-invertible symmetry operator from the authors' earlier work acts on that loop. The claimed results match continuum expectations: the operator either annihilates the loop or attaches a surface, depending on the magnetic charge and topology.

The paper does some things well. The construction of the action in Section 2.2 is careful about the three gauge symmetries, and the observation that the violations take the form ∗∪δv and δl∪∗ is nicely exploited. Extending the earlier dressing idea to axion QED is a natural and interesting step.

However, the central claim that Eq. (26) is gauge-invariant is not demonstrated. The stress-test note points out a concrete potential violation: under the Z(0) shift φ→φ+2πm, the term (i/2π)φ∪D_eρ changes by i m ∫_γ D_eρ = i m(2π∫_γ b − q^2 e∫_γ A). Since A is an R-valued cochain, this is not automatically a multiple of 2πi. No compensating term is shown; the paper simply asserts gauge invariance. This is load-bearing, because without it the dressed loop does not define the operator the authors think it does. The response computation in Section 3 also never applies the symmetry operator to the dressing fields φ, b, ρ; it only tracks the first factor exp(ie∫Ã). The non-uniqueness admitted in Section 2.3 means one cannot infer a cancellation from the construction alone.

This is a 9-page proceedings paper, so it is possible the full derivation appears in a longer companion paper, but as it stands the check is missing. If the gauge-invariance proof works out, this is a useful technical contribution; if not, the main results fail. The heavy self-citation is not itself a problem, but here the central operator is imported from Ref. [1] and the dressing from Ref. [27], so the genuinely new part is exactly the part that is under-verified.

My recommendation: send it to a referee, because the question is real and the authors have a plausible construction, but the referee should insist on a complete verification of Eq. (26) under the three gauge transformations. I would not cite it yet.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper constructs a lattice version of axion QED using the modified Villain formulation. The authors write down a gauge-invariant action, identify the gauge transformations of the Lagrange multipliers that restore invariance under the three gauge symmetries, and observe that naive 't Hooft loops and axion strings are not gauge invariant. To fix this, they introduce fields localized on the 't Hooft loop and define a dressed operator in Eq. (26). They then import the non-invertible chiral symmetry operator of Ref. [1] and compute its action on the axion operator, the Wilson loop, and the dressed 't Hooft loop, obtaining annihilation in some cases and a surface attachment in others, Eqs. (30)--(34).

Significance. The paper is a proceedings contribution with a clear and well-scoped goal. If the construction is correct, it provides a lattice realization of axion QED in which a genuine, gauge-invariant 't Hooft loop can be defined and its transformation under the non-invertible chiral symmetry computed without half-space gauging. The modified Villain formulation is a suitable tool because it makes magnetic objects local and the fields single-valued. The paper explicitly states the claimed response (annihilation for e not in NZ and a non-contractible loop, surface attachment otherwise), which is a concrete and falsifiable prediction. Its main weakness is that the central derivations are compressed: the gauge invariance of the dressed operator and the action of the symmetry operator on the dressing fields are not shown.

major comments (4)

[Section 3, Eqs. (32)-(34)] The response computation never applies U_{2π p/N} to the dressing fields φ, b, ρ that appear in the path-integral definition of T_e(γ) in Eq. (26). The derivation tracks only the factor exp(i e ∑_γ \tilde a) and the BF partition function (29). Since U_{2π p/N} acts by a chiral shift of the axion (cf. Eq. (30)), it can act on the field φ in the dressing term (i/2π)φ∪D_eρ and on the measure of φ, b, ρ; additional phases could arise from the kinetic terms and the −i l∪ρ coupling. The paper must compute this action explicitly and show that it either vanishes or produces exactly the surface term in Eq. (33), before Eqs. (32)--(34) can be taken as established.
[Section 2.3, Eq. (26)] Gauge invariance of the dressed 't Hooft loop is asserted but not demonstrated. Under the Z(0) transformation φ→φ+2πm, l→l−δm, the term (i/2π)φ∪D_eρ changes by i m∪D_eρ, while the first factor exp(i e ∑_γ \tilde a) changes by exp(i e q^2 ∑_γ m∪a) because of Eq. (18). The cancellation of the a-dependent part relies on the presence of the −i l∪ρ term in Eq. (26), and the cancellation of the δρ part requires a cup-product boundary identity; neither step is shown. Given the acknowledged non-uniqueness of the dressing (Section 2.3), the reader cannot verify that Eq. (26) is invariant under all three gauge transformations. Please provide the explicit gauge variation of Eq. (26).
[Section 2.3, Eq. (26)] The dressed operator depends on the arbitrary finite-length parameters λ_φ and λ_ρ and on a non-unique choice of the localized fields (φ,b,ρ). The paper does not argue that the response computed in Section 3 is independent of these parameters and choices. If U_{2π p/N} acts on the dressing fields, the surface attachment or annihilation in Eqs. (32)--(34) could acquire operator-dependent phases; the universality of the claimed response is therefore not established.
[Section 2.3] The physical interpretation of T_e(γ) as a genuine 't Hooft loop requires that the added degrees of freedom φ,b,ρ do not alter the operator's correlation functions beyond restoring gauge invariance. The paper does not show that these fields decouple in the continuum limit or that the non-uniqueness of the dressing is irrelevant to physical observables. This is necessary for the results in Section 3 to describe the conventional 't Hooft loop.

minor comments (4)

[Eq. (26)] The last term in the exponential is rendered as `− i n ∪ ρ`; this notation is undefined because n is not among the integration variables. It should presumably be `− i l ∪ ρ` using the axion Villain field l from Eq. (4); please correct and clarify.
[Eq. (30)] The right-hand side appears to be missing an exponential factor: it should read exp(i q^2 2π p/N) multiplied by the correlation function, not q^2 2π p i/N. Please check the typesetting.
[Eq. (29)] The normalization prefactor in the BF partition function Z_{M3}[v] is not specified (shown as 1/N^a); the value of a affects the normalization and should be stated.
[Abstract and Introduction] The paper advertises that the method does not use half-space gauging, but the relation to half-space gauging is not discussed after the abstract; a brief remark connecting the construction to the continuum results of Ref. [13] would be helpful.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found; self-citations are published inputs, and the response claims are abbreviated but not definitionally forced.

full rationale

No load-bearing circularity is exhibited. The non-invertible operator in Eq (28) is imported from the authors' earlier Ref [1], but that is an independently published lattice construction; using it as the symmetry operator is a stated input rather than a conclusion smuggled in as a prediction. Likewise, the dressing of the 't Hooft loop in Eqs (21)-(26) follows Ref [27], a published result, and the gauge transformations are written out explicitly rather than assumed from the response one wants. The response formulas (30)-(34) are asserted with little derivation in this proceedings text, and in particular the action of U on the new loop-local fields φ, b, ρ in Eq (26) is not computed; this is an omitted or abbreviated proof and a potential correctness risk. But circularity would require Eq (32) or (33) to equal an input by construction. The paper's input (U and T_e) does not contain the claimed response: U is defined with a BF partition function, T_e is a dressed exponential of the Villain multiplier, and the claimed surface attachment or annihilation follows from a nontrivial BF path-integral property. There is no fitted parameter later presented as a prediction, no renamed known result, and no ansatz hidden inside a citation. The paper explicitly acknowledges the non-uniqueness of the gauge-invariance restoration in Section 2.3, which is a limitation but not a circular reduction. Therefore the derivation chain is not circular, despite heavy reliance on the authors' prior published work.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 3 invented entities

The paper's central claim rests on the modified Villain framework (imported from Ref [15]), cup product technology (Refs [23,24]), the BF partition function property (from the authors' own Ref [1]), and the new assumption that localized fields can repair gauge invariance. The only new free parameters are the kinetic coefficients g_phi and g_rho on the dressed loop; the other constants (q, mu, e_0) are fixed inputs of the axion QED model.

free parameters (2)

g_phi
Coefficient of the kinetic term for the new field φ on the 't Hooft loop, introduced in Eq (26) with dimension of length; its value is arbitrary and not determined by the construction.
g_rho
Coefficient of the kinetic term for the new field ρ in Eq (26); arbitrary parameter with dimension of length.

assumptions (5)

standard math Modified Villain formulation provides a valid lattice regularization of U(1) gauge theory and periodic scalar field with the required Bianchi identities.
Taken from Ref [15]; used throughout Section 2.
standard math Cup products and higher cup products on hypercubic lattices satisfy the identities needed to construct the Chern-Simons-like term (CS) in Eq (14).
References [23,24] supply these lattice cohomology tools.
domain assumption The lattice BF partition function Z_{M3}[ν] has the property that it vanishes when the 't Hooft loop charge is not in N Z and the loop is non-contractible modulo N.
Property used in Eq (32) to show the non-invertible symmetry operator annihilates the 't Hooft loop; this property is established in the authors' previous Ref [1].
domain assumption The integer q in the axion-photon coupling must be even for gauge invariance, inherited from the fermion charge in the UV theory.
Stated in Section 2.2 immediately after Eq (11); constrains the lattice action.
domain assumption The kinetic coefficients μ and e_0 (gauge coupling) are treated as fixed parameters of the continuum axion QED, and the lattice action is assumed to have the correct continuum limit.
Standard assumption in lattice constructions; the paper does not investigate the continuum limit.

invented entities (3)

Field φ localized on the 't Hooft loop
purpose: Restores Z(0) gauge invariance of the 't Hooft loop operator under axion periodicity.
Introduced in Eqs (21)-(26); no observable outside this construction, no independent experimental handle.
Field b localized on the 't Hooft loop
purpose: Restores Z(1) gauge invariance under photon Villain gauge transformations.
Eqs (22), (25); construction device.
Field ρ localized on the 't Hooft loop
purpose: Restores R(0) gauge invariance under continuum photon gauge transformations.
Eqs (23), (25); construction device.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Axion QED as a Lattice Gauge Theory and Non-Invertible Symmetry." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RV36KA4Z

@misc{pith2026241208142,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Axion QED as a Lattice Gauge Theory and Non-Invertible Symmetry},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RV36KA4Z}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.08142}
}

read the original abstract

We investigate the non-invertible symmetry associated with chiral symmetry in axion quantum electrodynamics (QED) using the modified Villain formulation. In axion QED, it is known that naive magnetic objects such as 't Hooft loops and axion strings lose their gauge invariance due to the violation of the Bianchi identity for the field strength of the photon or "field strength" of the axion. First, we construct the action of axion QED on the square lattice, which is more intricate than its counterpart in the continuum theory. We then observe the breaking of gauge invariance. Subsequently, we construct gauge-invariant magnetic objects by introducing new degrees of freedom localized at the positions of the magnetic objects. Furthermore, we explicitly compute the response of the magnetic objects under the action of the non-invertible symmetry operator constructed in Ref. [1]. In this analysis, we employ a method different from the so-called half-space gauging, which is the standard method to study non-invertible symmetries.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

28 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages

[1]

Lattice realization of the axial $U(1)$ noninvertible symmetry

Y . Honda, O. Morikawa, S. Onoda and H.Suzuki, Lattice realization of the axial /u1D448(1) non- invertible symmetry, PTEP 2024 (2024) 4, 043B04 [arXiv2401.01331 [hep-lat]]

work page Pith review arXiv 2024
[27]

Y . Honda, S .Onoda and H.Suzuki, Action of the axial /u1D448(1) non-invertible symme- try on the ’t Hooft line operator: A simple argument , PTEP 2024 (2024) 11, 113B02 [arXiv:2405.07669 [hep-lat]]

arXiv 2024
[2]

’t Hooft, Naturalness, chiral symmetry, and spontaneous chiral symm etry breaking , NATO Sci.Ser.B 59 (1980) 135

G. ’t Hooft, Naturalness, chiral symmetry, and spontaneous chiral symm etry breaking , NATO Sci.Ser.B 59 (1980) 135

work page 1980
[3]

S. L. Adler, Axial vector vertex in spinor electrodynamics , Phys.Rev.177 (1969) 2426

work page 1969
[4]

Bell and R

J.S. Bell and R. Jackiw, A PCAC puzzle: /u1D70B0 → /u1D6FE/u1D6FEin the /u1D70Emodel, Nuovo Cim.A 60 (1969) 47

work page 1969
[5]

Kapustin and R

A. Kapustin and R. Thorngren, Higher Symmetry and Gapped Phases of Gauge Theories , Prog.Math. 324 (2017) 177 [arXiv:1309.4721 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2017
[6]

Kapustin and N

A. Kapustin and N. Seiberg, Coupling a QFT to a TQFT and Duality , JHEP 04 (2014) 001 [arXiv:1401.0740 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2014
[7]

Gaiotto, A

D. Gaiotto, A. Kapustin, N. Seiberg and B. Willett, Generalized Global Symmetries , JHEP 02 (2015) 172 [arXiv:1412.5148 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2015

Show all 28 references

[8]

Y . Choi, H. T. Lam and S. H. Shao, Noninvertible Global Symmetries in the Standard Model , Phys.Rev.Lett.129 (2022) 16, 161601 [arXiv:2205.05086 [hep-th]]

2022 arXiv
[9]

Córdova and K

C. Córdova and K. Ohmori, Noninvertible Chiral Symmetry and Exponential Hierarchie s, Phys.Rev.X13 (2023) 1, 011034 [arXiv:2205.06243 [hep-th]]

2023 arXiv
[10]

Koide, Y

M. Koide, Y . Nagoya and S. Y amaguchi, Non-invertible topological defects in 4-dimensional Z2 pure lattice gauge theory, PTEP 2022 (2022) 1, 013B03 [arXiv:2109.05992 [hep-th]]

2022 arXiv
[11]

Y . Choi, C. Córdova, P. S. Hsin, H. T. Lam and S. H. Shao, Noninvertible duality defects in 3 + 1 dimensions, Phys.Rev.D105 (2022) 12, 125016 [arXiv:2111.01139 [hep-th]]

2022 arXiv
[12]

Kaidi, K

J. Kaidi, K. Ohmori and Y . Zheng, Kramers-Wannier-like Duality Defects in (3 + 1)D Gauge Theories, Phys.Rev.Lett.128 (2022) 11, 111601 [arXiv:2111.01141 [hep-th]]

2022 arXiv
[13]

Y . Choi, H. T. Lam and S. H. Shao,Non-invertible Gauss law and axions, JHEP 09 (2023) 067 [arXiv:2212.04499 [hep-th]]

2023 arXiv
[14]

Y okokura, Non-invertible symmetries in axion electrodynamics , arXiv:2212.05001 [hep-th]

R. Y okokura, Non-invertible symmetries in axion electrodynamics , arXiv:2212.05001 [hep-th]

arXiv
[15]

Sulejmanpasic and C

T. Sulejmanpasic and C. Gattringer, Abelian gauge theories on the lattice: /u1D703- Terms and compact gauge theory with(out) monopoles , Nucl.Phys.B 943 (2019) 114616 [arXiv:1901.02637 [hep-lat]]

2019 arXiv
[16]

Jacobson, Gauging C on the Lattice , arXiv:2406.12075 [hep-th]

T. Jacobson, Gauging C on the Lattice , arXiv:2406.12075 [hep-th]

arXiv
[17]

J. A. Harvey, TASI 2003 lectures on anomalies , arXiv:0509097 [hep-th]. 8 Axion QED as a Lattice Gauge Theory and Non-Invertible Symme try Y amato Honda

2003
[18]

Córdova, D

C. Córdova, D. S. Freed, H. T. Lam and N. Seiberg, Anomalies in the Space of Coupling Constants and Their Dynamical Applications I , SciPost Phys. 8 (2020) 1, 001 [arXiv:1905.09315 [hep-th]]

2020 arXiv
[19]

Fukuda, K

H. Fukuda, K. Y onekura, AWitten eﬀect, anomaly inﬂow, and charge teleportation , JHEP 01 (2021) 119 [arXiv:2010.02221 [hep-th]]

2021 arXiv
[20]

J. Fan, K. Fraser, M. Reece and J. Stout, Axion Mass from Magnetic Monopole Loops , Phys.Rev.Lett.127 (2021) 13, 131602 [arXiv:2105.09950 [hep-ph]]

2021 arXiv
[21]

Heidenreich, M

B. Heidenreich, M. Reece, T. Rudelius, The Weak Gravity Conjecture and axion strings , JHEP 11 (2021) 004 [arXiv:2108.11383 [hep-th]]

2021 arXiv
[22]

Heidenreich, J

B. Heidenreich, J. McNamara, M. Reece, Non-standard axion electrodynamics and the dual Witten eﬀect , JHEP 01 (2024) 120 [arXiv:2309.07951 [hep-ph]]

2024 arXiv
[23]

Y . A. Chen and S. Tata, Higher cup products on hypercubic lattices: Ap- plication to lattice models of topological phases , J.Math.Phys. 64 (2023) 9, 091902 [arXiv:2106.05274 [cond-mat.str-el]]

2023 arXiv
[24]

Jacobson and T Sulejmanpasic, Modiﬁed Villain formulation of Abelian Chern-Simons theory, Phys.Rev.D107 (2023) 12, 125017 [arXiv:2303.06160 [hep-th]]

T. Jacobson and T Sulejmanpasic, Modiﬁed Villain formulation of Abelian Chern-Simons theory, Phys.Rev.D107 (2023) 12, 125017 [arXiv:2303.06160 [hep-th]]

2023 arXiv
[25]

Dimakis, F

A. Dimakis, F. M. Hoissen andT. Striker, Noncommutative diﬀerential calculus and lattice gauge theory, J.Phys.A 26 (1993) 1927

1993
[26]

Honda, S

Y . Honda, S. Onoda and H.Suzuki, Action of the axial /u1D448(1) non-invertible symmetry on the ’t Hooft line operator: A lattice gauge theory study , PTEP 2024 (2024) 7, 073B04 [arXiv:2403.16752 [hep-lat]]

2024 arXiv
[28]

Gorantla, H

P. Gorantla, H. T. Lam, N. Seiberg and S. H. Shao, A modiﬁed Villain for- mulation of fractons and other exotic theories , J.Math.Phys. 62 (2021) 10, 102301 [arXiv:2103.01257 [cond-mat.str-el]]. 9

2021 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Lattice realization of the axial $U(1)$ noninvertible symmetry

Y . Honda, O. Morikawa, S. Onoda and H.Suzuki, Lattice realization of the axial /u1D448(1) non- invertible symmetry, PTEP 2024 (2024) 4, 043B04 [arXiv2401.01331 [hep-lat]]

work page Pith review arXiv 2024

[2] [27]

Y . Honda, S .Onoda and H.Suzuki, Action of the axial /u1D448(1) non-invertible symme- try on the ’t Hooft line operator: A simple argument , PTEP 2024 (2024) 11, 113B02 [arXiv:2405.07669 [hep-lat]]

arXiv 2024

[3] [2]

’t Hooft, Naturalness, chiral symmetry, and spontaneous chiral symm etry breaking , NATO Sci.Ser.B 59 (1980) 135

G. ’t Hooft, Naturalness, chiral symmetry, and spontaneous chiral symm etry breaking , NATO Sci.Ser.B 59 (1980) 135

work page 1980

[4] [3]

S. L. Adler, Axial vector vertex in spinor electrodynamics , Phys.Rev.177 (1969) 2426

work page 1969

[5] [4]

Bell and R

J.S. Bell and R. Jackiw, A PCAC puzzle: /u1D70B0 → /u1D6FE/u1D6FEin the /u1D70Emodel, Nuovo Cim.A 60 (1969) 47

work page 1969

[6] [5]

Kapustin and R

A. Kapustin and R. Thorngren, Higher Symmetry and Gapped Phases of Gauge Theories , Prog.Math. 324 (2017) 177 [arXiv:1309.4721 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2017

[7] [6]

Kapustin and N

A. Kapustin and N. Seiberg, Coupling a QFT to a TQFT and Duality , JHEP 04 (2014) 001 [arXiv:1401.0740 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2014

[8] [7]

Gaiotto, A

D. Gaiotto, A. Kapustin, N. Seiberg and B. Willett, Generalized Global Symmetries , JHEP 02 (2015) 172 [arXiv:1412.5148 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2015