pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.16482 · v2 · pith:HXAXAA3Enew · submitted 2026-05-15 · ✦ hep-th · cond-mat.str-el

When Symmetries Twist: Anomaly Inflow on Monodromy Defects

Christian Copetti This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-30 19:13 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-th cond-mat.str-el
keywords monodromy defectsanomaly inflowtopological symmetry operatorsSPT phaseschiral symmetriesdomain wallsedge modesbackground flux
0
0 comments X

The pith

Monodromy defects in anomalous theories must be defined as domain walls between symmetry generators and anomaly-induced topological order.

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

The paper studies monodromy defects that terminate topological symmetry operators and are sourced by localized background magnetic flux. When the theory has an anomaly, the flux itself sources the anomaly, so the defect cannot be defined in the usual way and instead requires a topological dressing as a domain wall between the symmetry generator and the anomaly-induced topological order. This structure produces protected chiral edge modes on the defect worldvolume and allows adiabatic pumping of gapless modes tied to the flux. The same logic applies both to gapped SPT phases and to gapless theories with anomalous symmetries, and the predictions are checked in explicit continuum and lattice examples with anomalous chiral symmetries.

Core claim

Monodromy defects describe a dynamical termination of topological symmetry operators sourced by a localized background magnetic flux. The background flux acts as a source for the anomaly, impacting the definition of the monodromy defect, which can only be defined as a domain wall between the symmetry generator and a topological order induced by the anomaly. The topological dressing has several consequences, such as the presence of protected chiral edge modes on the defect's worldvolume, and the adiabatic pumping of gapless degrees of freedom bound to the localized flux.

What carries the argument

Monodromy defects redefined as domain walls between symmetry generators and anomaly-induced topological orders via anomaly inflow from the localized flux.

If this is right

  • The defect worldvolume hosts protected chiral edge modes.
  • Gapless degrees of freedom bound to the localized flux undergo adiabatic pumping.
  • The definition of the monodromy defect changes in the presence of anomalies compared to the non-anomalous case.
  • Predictions hold in both gapped SPT phases and gapless anomalous theories, verified explicitly for chiral symmetries in continuum and lattice settings.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same inflow mechanism could be applied to defects in higher spacetime dimensions or to other classes of anomalous symmetries beyond chiral ones.
  • The topological dressing may provide a new way to classify symmetry defects in SPT phases by their anomaly inflow properties.
  • These results suggest concrete lattice models where moving a flux thread could pump observable gapless modes across a sample.

Load-bearing premise

Monodromy defects describe a dynamical termination of topological symmetry operators that can be sourced by a localized background magnetic flux, allowing anomaly inflow to apply directly.

What would settle it

A calculation or lattice simulation showing that monodromy defects for an anomalous chiral symmetry lack protected chiral edge modes on their worldvolume or show no pumping of gapless modes when the flux is adiabatically moved would falsify the central claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.16482 by Christian Copetti.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: A monodromy defect M(g) can be thought of as a dynamical termination of a symmetry operator U(g), which imposes twisted boundary conditions in the angular direction. Alternatively, it is sourced by a localized G-flux (fractional, in the discrete case). 1 Introduction The space of defects in a quantum system has been the subject of intense recent study: defects arise naturally as impurities in condensed-mat… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Left: The monodromy defect M(g) defined as a domain wall between the symmetry defect U(g) and the topological decoration T(g). Right: The radial quantization frame S 2 × R around a point on the monodromy defect. The surfaces U(g) and T(g) intersect the spatial S 2 slice along meridians meeting at the poles. In this presentation, the action of a bulk symmetry U(h) ∈ CG(g) on the monodromy defect M(g) is enc… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: a) An SPT in the presence of a topological defect [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The inflow setup to describe an anomalous monodromy defect [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Using the topological decoration T(g) to correctly define a twisted Hilbert space. The cyan region represents the stacking of τ (g); rotating T(g) around the junction M(g) recasts the setup as a single composite defect U(g) ⊗ T† (g). of the properties of M(g) from the inflow analysis of T(g), without resorting to a detailed analysis of the gapless theory T . We can recover a purely boundary perspective by … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The spectral pump along the parameter space of the monodromy defect. As the parameter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Left, the spectrum in the presence of a monodromy defect. The white area contains the singular [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Above, the combined spectral sea for the Dirac fermion. The left and right Weyl fermion copies [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Above, the combined spectral sea for the Dirac fermion. The left and right Weyl fermion copies [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Chiral modes bound to a fractional axion string: inside the core the UV fermions are deconfined [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Left: The monodromy defect M(g) defined as the endpoint of a symmetry defect U(g) on the dual lattice, gauge fields Aℓ = g ±1 are turned on along the marked links. The green plaquette hosts flux for Aℓ . Right: The action of the composite translation Tγ around a closed loop γ on the standard lattice, traversing exactly one dual link. Monodromy defects The monodromy defect M(g), instead, can only be define… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Monodromy defects describe a dynamical termination of topological symmetry operators, and are sourced by a localized background magnetic flux. We study their properties in gapped SPT phases and, by inflow, in gapless theories with an anomalous symmetry. The background flux acts as a source for the anomaly, impacting the definition of the monodromy defect, which can only be defined as a domain wall between the symmetry generator and a topological order induced by the anomaly. The topological dressing has several consequences, such as the presence of protected chiral edge modes on the defect's worldvolume, and the adiabatic pumping of gapless degrees of freedom bound to the localized flux. We verify our predictions in several examples, focusing on monodromy defects for anomalous chiral symmetries, both in the continuum and on the lattice.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper studies monodromy defects, defined as dynamical terminations of topological symmetry operators sourced by localized background magnetic flux. It analyzes their properties in gapped SPT phases and, via anomaly inflow, in gapless theories with anomalous symmetries. The background flux sources the anomaly and requires the defect to be realized as a domain wall between the symmetry generator and an anomaly-induced topological order. This topological dressing implies protected chiral edge modes on the defect worldvolume and adiabatic pumping of gapless degrees of freedom bound to the flux. The claims are verified through explicit examples of anomalous chiral symmetries in both continuum and lattice constructions.

Significance. If the derivations and examples hold, the work provides a concrete framework for incorporating anomaly inflow into the definition of monodromy defects, with direct consequences for edge modes and pumping phenomena. The explicit verification in chiral-symmetry examples (continuum and lattice) supplies reproducible checks that strengthen the central claims. This contributes a useful perspective on defect anomalies in both gapped and gapless settings.

minor comments (3)
  1. [§3] §3 (or wherever the domain-wall definition is introduced): the statement that the defect 'can only be defined' as a dressed domain wall would benefit from a short paragraph contrasting this with the naive undressed case to clarify the necessity.
  2. [lattice examples section] The lattice examples in the final section would be easier to follow if the specific lattice regularization (e.g., staggered fermions or Wilson fermions) and the precise anomaly-matching condition were stated explicitly in a dedicated paragraph.
  3. Figure captions should include a brief reminder of the anomaly coefficient or flux value used in each panel to aid quick cross-reference with the text.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive summary of our work, the assessment of its significance, and the recommendation for minor revision. No specific major comments were listed in the report.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The provided abstract and context describe anomaly inflow applied to monodromy defects defined via domain walls between symmetry generators and anomaly-induced topological order, with consequences like chiral modes and flux pumping verified in chiral symmetry examples. No equations, self-citations, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or load-bearing uniqueness theorems are exhibited in the given material. The derivation chain relies on standard anomaly inflow reasoning applied to a physically motivated defect definition, remaining self-contained against external benchmarks without reducing to its own inputs by construction. This is the expected honest non-finding for papers lacking explicit self-referential structure.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; limited visibility into assumptions. The central claims rest on standard anomaly inflow and SPT concepts without explicit free parameters or new entities listed.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Anomaly inflow principle applies to monodromy defects in gapped SPT phases and gapless anomalous theories
    Invoked to define defects as domain walls and derive consequences like chiral modes and pumping

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5653 in / 1281 out tokens · 33297 ms · 2026-06-30T19:13:58.245012+00:00 · methodology

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Boundary Layers and One-point Functions in the Presence of Monodromy Defects

    hep-th 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Computes one-point functions of charge-e operators in free massless/massive theories and holographic N=4 SYM with U(1) monodromy defects, finding sin and sin² dependencies plus boundary-layer resolution of anchored saddles.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

141 extracted references · 123 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 52 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Generalized Global Symmetries

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  2. [2]

    Topological constraints on defect dynamics,

    A. Antinucci, C. Copetti, G. Galati, and G. Rizi, “Topological constraints on defect dynamics,”Phys. Rev. D111no. 6, (2025) 065025,arXiv:2412.18652 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2025

  3. [3]

    Defect Anomalies, a Spin-Flux Duality, and Boson-Kondo Problems,

    Z. Komargodski, F. K. Popov, and B. C. Rayhaun, “Defect Anomalies, a Spin-Flux Duality, and Boson-Kondo Problems,”arXiv:2508.14963 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  4. [4]

    Noninvertible Symmetries, Anomalies, and Scattering Amplitudes,

    C. Copetti, L. Cordova, and S. Komatsu, “Noninvertible Symmetries, Anomalies, and Scattering Amplitudes,”Phys. Rev. Lett.133no. 18, (2024) 181601,arXiv:2403.04835 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2024

  5. [5]

    S-matrix bootstrap and non-invertible symmetries,

    C. Copetti, L. Cordova, and S. Komatsu, “S-matrix bootstrap and non-invertible symmetries,”JHEP03 (2025) 204,arXiv:2408.13132 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    Particle-soliton degeneracies from spontaneously broken non-invertible symmetry,

    C. Cordova, D. Garc´ ıa-Sep´ ulveda, and N. Holfester, “Particle-soliton degeneracies from spontaneously broken non-invertible symmetry,”JHEP07(2024) 154,arXiv:2403.08883 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    Representation Theory of Solitons

    C. Cordova, N. Holfester, and K. Ohmori, “Representation Theory of Solitons,” (8, 2024) , arXiv:2408.11045 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    Monopoles, scattering, and generalized symmetries,

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

    work page arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    Fermion-monopole scattering in the Standard Model,

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

    work page arXiv 2024

  10. [10]

    Dynamics of the Fermion-Rotor System,

    V. Loladze, T. Okui, and D. Tong, “Dynamics of the Fermion-Rotor System,”arXiv:2508.21059 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  11. [11]

    Universal Constraints for Conformal Line Defects,

    B. Gabai, A. Sever, and D.-l. Zhong, “Universal Constraints for Conformal Line Defects,” (1, 2025) , arXiv:2501.06900 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    Integral Identities from Symmetry Breaking of Conformal Defects,

    Z. Kong, “Integral Identities from Symmetry Breaking of Conformal Defects,” in14th International Workshop on Lie Theory and Its Applications in Physics. 9, 2025.arXiv:2509.23797 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2025

  13. [13]

    There and Back Again: Bulk-to-Defect via Ward Identities,

    J. Belton and Z. Kong, “There and Back Again: Bulk-to-Defect via Ward Identities,”arXiv:2510.08519 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  14. [14]

    't Hooft anomalies and boundaries

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  15. [15]

    Anomalous symmetries end at the boundary,

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

    work page arXiv 2021

  16. [16]

    Higher Structures on Boundary Conformal Manifolds: Higher Berry Phase and Boundary Conformal Field Theory,

    Y. Choi, H. Ha, D. Kim, Y. Kusuki, S. Ohyama, and S. Ryu, “Higher Structures on Boundary Conformal Manifolds: Higher Berry Phase and Boundary Conformal Field Theory,”arXiv:2507.12525 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  17. [17]

    ’t Hooft Anomalies and Defect Conformal Manifolds: Topological Signatures from Modulated Effective Actions,

    C. Copetti, “’t Hooft Anomalies and Defect Conformal Manifolds: Topological Signatures from Modulated Effective Actions,”arXiv:2507.15466 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  18. [18]

    Charge pumps, pivot Hamiltonians, and symmetry-protected topological phases,

    N. G. Jones, R. Thorngren, R. Verresen, and A. Prakash, “Charge pumps, pivot Hamiltonians, and symmetry-protected topological phases,”Phys. Rev. B112no. 16, (2025) 165123,arXiv:2507.00995 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page arXiv 2025

  19. [19]

    A Long Exact Sequence in Symmetry Breaking: order parameter constraints, defect anomaly-matching, and higher Berry phases

    A. Debray, S. K. Devalapurkar, C. Krulewski, Y. L. Liu, N. Pacheco-Tallaj, and R. Thorngren, “A long exact sequence in symmetry breaking: order parameter constraints, defect anomaly-matching, and higher Berry phases,”JHEP07(2025) 007,arXiv:2309.16749 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  20. [20]

    Higher Gauging and Non-invertible Condensation Defects

    K. Roumpedakis, S. Seifnashri, and S.-H. Shao, “Higher gauging and non-invertible condensation defects,” Commun. Math. Phys.401(2023) 3043–3107,arXiv:2204.02407 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  21. [21]

    Higher Structure of Chiral Symmetry,

    C. Copetti, M. Del Zotto, K. Ohmori, and Y. Wang, “Higher Structure of Chiral Symmetry,” arXiv:2305.18282 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  22. [22]

    Symmetry Fractionalization, Defects, and Gauging of Topological Phases,

    M. Barkeshli, P. Bonderson, M. Cheng, and Z. Wang, “Symmetry Fractionalization, Defects, and Gauging of Topological Phases,”Phys. Rev. B100no. 11, (2019) 115147,arXiv:1410.4540 [cond-mat.str-el]. 38

    work page arXiv 2019

  23. [23]

    The holography of non-invertible self-duality symmetries,

    A. Antinucci, F. Benini, C. Copetti, G. Galati, and G. Rizi, “The holography of non-invertible self-duality symmetries,”arXiv:2210.09146 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  24. [24]

    Rigid Surface Operators

    S. Gukov and E. Witten, “Rigid Surface Operators,”Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.14no. 1, (2010) 87–178, arXiv:0804.1561 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  25. [25]

    Surface Defects and Chiral Algebras

    C. Cordova, D. Gaiotto, and S.-H. Shao, “Surface Defects and Chiral Algebras,”JHEP05(2017) 140, arXiv:1704.01955 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  26. [26]

    Superconformal surfaces in four dimensions,

    L. Bianchi and M. Lemos, “Superconformal surfaces in four dimensions,”JHEP06(2020) 056, arXiv:1911.05082 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2020

  27. [27]

    Superconformal monodromy defects in N=4 SYM and LS theory,

    I. Arav, J. P. Gauntlett, Y. Jiao, M. M. Roberts, and C. Rosen, “Superconformal monodromy defects in N=4 SYM and LS theory,”JHEP08(2024) 177,arXiv:2405.06014 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2024

  28. [28]

    Superconformal monodromy defects in ABJM and mABJM theory,

    I. Arav, J. P. Gauntlett, Y. Jiao, M. M. Roberts, and C. Rosen, “Superconformal monodromy defects in ABJM and mABJM theory,”JHEP11(2024) 008,arXiv:2408.11088 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2024

  29. [29]

    Monodromy defects in free field theories,

    L. Bianchi, A. Chalabi, V. Proch´ azka, B. Robinson, and J. Sisti, “Monodromy defects in free field theories,” JHEP08(2021) 013,arXiv:2104.01220 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2021

  30. [30]

    The $\epsilon$-expansion of the codimension two twist defect from conformal field theory

    S. Yamaguchi, “Theϵ-expansion of the codimension two twist defect from conformal field theory,”PTEP 2016no. 9, (2016) 091B01,arXiv:1607.05551 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  31. [31]

    Anomalous Dimensions in the WF O($N$) Model with a Monodromy Line Defect

    A. S¨ oderberg, “Anomalous Dimensions in the WF O(N) Model with a Monodromy Line Defect,”JHEP03 (2018) 058,arXiv:1706.02414 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  32. [32]

    Monodromy defects from hyperbolic space,

    S. Giombi, E. Helfenberger, Z. Ji, and H. Khanchandani, “Monodromy defects from hyperbolic space,” JHEP02(2022) 041,arXiv:2102.11815 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2022

  33. [33]

    The O(N)-flavoured replica twist defect,

    A. S¨ oderberg Rousu, “The O(N)-flavoured replica twist defect,”JHEP07(2023) 022,arXiv:2304.08116 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2023

  34. [34]

    Bootstrapping line defects with O(2) global symmetry,

    A. Gimenez-Grau, E. Lauria, P. Liendo, and P. van Vliet, “Bootstrapping line defects with O(2) global symmetry,”JHEP11(2022) 018,arXiv:2208.11715 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2022

  35. [35]

    Monodromy Pinning Defects in the Critical $\mathrm{O}(2N)$ Model

    P. Kravchuk and A. Radcliffe, “Monodromy Pinning Defects in the Critical O(2N) Model,” arXiv:2510.02281 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  36. [36]

    Line defects in the 3d Ising model

    M. Bill´ o, M. Caselle, D. Gaiotto, F. Gliozzi, M. Meineri, and R. Pellegrini, “Line defects in the 3d Ising model,”JHEP07(2013) 055,arXiv:1304.4110 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  37. [37]

    Bootstrapping the 3d Ising twist defect

    D. Gaiotto, D. Mazac, and M. F. Paulos, “Bootstrapping the 3d Ising twist defect,”JHEP03(2014) 100, arXiv:1310.5078 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  38. [38]

    Scaling of the disorder operator at (2+1)d U(1) quantum criticality,

    Y.-C. Wang, M. Cheng, and Z. Y. Meng, “Scaling of the disorder operator at (2+1)d U(1) quantum criticality,”Phys. Rev. B104no. 8, (2021) 081109,arXiv:2101.10358 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page arXiv 2021

  39. [39]

    Scaling of the disorder operator at deconfined quantum criticality,

    Y.-C. Wang, N. Ma, M. Cheng, and Z. Y. Meng, “Scaling of the disorder operator at deconfined quantum criticality,”SciPost Phys.13no. 6, (2022) 123,arXiv:2106.01380 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page arXiv 2022

  40. [40]

    Symmetry fractionalization and twist defects

    L. Fidkowski, N. H. Lindner, and N. Tarantino, “Symmetry fractionalization and twist defects,”New J. Phys.18no. 3, (2016) 035006,arXiv:1506.06754 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  41. [41]

    Disclinations, Dislocations, and Emanant Flux at Dirac Criticality,

    M. Barkeshli, C. Fechisin, Z. Komargodski, and S. Zhong, “Disclinations, Dislocations, and Emanant Flux at Dirac Criticality,”Phys. Rev. X16no. 1, (2026) 011017,arXiv:2501.13866 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page arXiv 2026

  42. [42]

    Pinning the order: the nature of quantum criticality in the Hubbard model on honeycomb lattice

    F. F. Assaad and I. F. Herbut, “Pinning the order: the nature of quantum criticality in the Hubbard model on honeycomb lattice,”Phys. Rev. X3(2013) 031010,arXiv:1304.6340 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  43. [43]

    Factorizing Defects from Generalized Pinning Fields,

    F. K. Popov and Y. Wang, “Factorizing Defects from Generalized Pinning Fields,” (4, 2025) , arXiv:2504.06203 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2025

  44. [44]

    Topological Insulators

    M. Z. Hasan and C. L. Kane, “Colloquium: Topological insulators,”Rev. Mod. Phys.82(2010) 3045, arXiv:1002.3895 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  45. [45]

    Symmetry protected topological orders and the group cohomology of their symmetry group

    X. Chen, Z.-C. Gu, Z.-X. Liu, and X.-G. Wen, “Symmetry protected topological orders and the group cohomology of their symmetry group,”Phys. Rev. B87no. 15, (2013) 155114,arXiv:1106.4772 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  46. [46]

    Preroughening transitions in crystal surfaces and valence-bond-solid phases in quantum spin chains,

    M. den Nijs and K. Rommelse, “Preroughening transitions in crystal surfaces and valence-bond-solid phases in quantum spin chains,”Phys. Rev. B40(1989) 4709

    1989

  47. [47]

    Hidden symmetry breaking and the Haldane phase inS=1 quantum spin chains,

    T. Kennedy and H. Tasaki, “Hidden symmetry breaking and the Haldane phase inS=1 quantum spin chains,”Commun. Math. Phys.147no. 3, (1992) 431–484. 39

    1992

  48. [48]

    Symmetry protection of topological order in one-dimensional quantum spin systems

    F. Pollmann, E. Berg, A. M. Turner, and M. Oshikawa, “Symmetry protection of topological phases in one-dimensional quantum spin systems,”Phys. Rev. B85no. 7, (2012) 075125,arXiv:0909.4059 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  49. [49]

    Shao and S

    S.-H. Shao and S. Zhong, “Where Non-Invertible Symmetries End: Twist Defects for Electromagnetic Duality,”arXiv:2509.21279 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  50. [50]

    Monodromy Defects for Electric-Magnetic Duality, Hyperbolic Space, and Lines

    V. Bashmakov, “Monodromy Defects for Electric-Magnetic Duality, Hyperbolic Space, and Lines,” arXiv:2604.15117 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  51. [51]

    Anomalies in the space of coupling constants and their dynamical applications I,

    C. C´ ordova, 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) 001,arXiv:1905.09315 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2020

  52. [52]

    Anomalies in the Space of Coupling Constants and Their Dynamical Applications II,

    C. C´ ordova, D. S. Freed, H. T. Lam, and N. Seiberg, “Anomalies in the Space of Coupling Constants and Their Dynamical Applications II,”SciPost Phys.8no. 1, (2020) 002,arXiv:1905.13361 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2020

  53. [53]

    Anomalies and fermion zero modes on strings and domain walls,

    C. G. Callan, Jr. and J. A. Harvey, “Anomalies and fermion zero modes on strings and domain walls,” Nucl. Phys. B250(1985) 427–436

    1985

  54. [54]

    To appear,

    P. Boyle Smith, M. Caramanti, G. Cuomo, M. Tortora, and Y. Wang, “To appear,” (2026)

    2026

  55. [55]

    The extraordinary boundary transition in the 3d O(N) model via conformal bootstrap,

    J. Padayasi, A. Krishnan, M. A. Metlitski, I. A. Gruzberg, and M. Meineri, “The extraordinary boundary transition in the 3d O(N) model via conformal bootstrap,”SciPost Phys.12no. 6, (2022) 190, arXiv:2111.03071 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    work page arXiv 2022

  56. [56]

    Boundary conformal field theory at large charge,

    G. Cuomo, M. Mezei, and A. Raviv-Moshe, “Boundary conformal field theory at large charge,”JHEP10 (2021) 143,arXiv:2108.06579 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2021

  57. [57]

    Broken Global Symmetries and Defect Conformal Manifolds,

    N. Drukker, Z. Kong, and G. Sakkas, “Broken Global Symmetries and Defect Conformal Manifolds,”Phys. Rev. Lett.129no. 20, (2022) 201603,arXiv:2203.17157 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2022

  58. [58]

    Tilting space of boundary conformal field theories,

    C. P. Herzog and V. Schaub, “Tilting space of boundary conformal field theories,”Phys. Rev. D109no. 6, (2024) L061701,arXiv:2301.10789 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2024

  59. [59]

    Symmetry protected topological phases from decorated domain walls

    X. Chen, Y.-M. Lu, and A. Vishwanath, “Symmetry-protected topological phases from decorated domain walls,”Nature Communications5(2014) 3507,arXiv:1303.4301 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  60. [60]

    Domain Wall Decorations, Anomalies and Spectral Sequences in Bosonic Topological Phases,

    Q.-R. Wang, S.-Q. Ning, and M. Cheng, “Domain Wall Decorations, Anomalies and Spectral Sequences in Bosonic Topological Phases,”arXiv:2104.13233 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page arXiv

  61. [61]

    Anomaly Obstructions to Symmetry Preserving Gapped Phases,

    C. C´ ordova and K. Ohmori, “Anomaly Obstructions to Symmetry Preserving Gapped Phases,” arXiv:1910.04962 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 1910

  62. [62]

    Symmetric Gapped Interfaces of SPT and SET States: Systematic Constructions

    J. Wang, X.-G. Wen, and E. Witten, “Symmetric Gapped Interfaces of SPT and SET States: Systematic Constructions,”Phys. Rev. X8no. 3, (2018) 031048,arXiv:1705.06728 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  63. [63]

    Quantum Orders and Symmetric Spin Liquids

    X.-G. Wen, “Quantum orders and symmetric spin liquids,”Phys. Rev. B65no. 16, (2002) 165113, arXiv:cond-mat/0107071 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  64. [64]

    Classifying fractionalization: symmetry classification of gapped Z2 spin liquids in two dimensions

    A. M. Essin and M. Hermele, “Classifying fractionalization: symmetry classification of gappedZ 2 spin liquids in two dimensions,”Phys. Rev. B87(2013) 104406,arXiv:1212.0593 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  65. [65]

    Anomalous Symmetry Fractionalization and Surface Topological Order

    X. Chen, F. J. Burnell, A. Vishwanath, and L. Fidkowski, “Anomalous Symmetry Fractionalization and Surface Topological Order,”Phys. Rev. X5(2015) 041013,arXiv:1403.6491 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  66. [66]

    On 2-Group Global Symmetries and Their Anomalies

    F. Benini, C. C´ ordova, and P.-S. Hsin, “On 2-group global symmetries and their anomalies,”JHEP03 (2019) 118,arXiv:1803.09336 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  67. [67]

    Line Defect Quantum Numbers and Anomalies,

    T. D. Brennan, C. C´ ordova, and T. T. Dumitrescu, “Line Defect Quantum Numbers and Anomalies,” (2022) ,arXiv:2206.15401 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2022

  68. [68]

    Anomalies and Symmetry Fractionalization,

    D. Delmastro, J. Gomis, P.-S. Hsin, and Z. Komargodski, “Anomalies and Symmetry Fractionalization,” SciPost Phys.15(2023) 079,arXiv:2206.15118 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2023

  69. [69]

    Tachikawa, On gauging finite subgroups, arXiv e-prints arXiv:1712.09542 (2017), doi:10.48550/arXiv.1712.09542,1712.09542

    Y. Tachikawa, “On gauging finite subgroups,”SciPost Phys.8no. 1, (2020) 015,arXiv:1712.09542 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2020

  70. [70]

    Anomalous (3+1)d Fermionic Topological Quantum Field Theories via Symmetry Extension,

    Z. Wan and J. Wang, “Anomalous (3+1)d Fermionic Topological Quantum Field Theories via Symmetry Extension,”arXiv:2512.25038 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  71. [71]

    How to Build Anomalous (3+1)d Topological Quantum Field Theories,

    A. Debray, W. Ye, and M. Yu, “How to Build Anomalous (3+1)d Topological Quantum Field Theories,” arXiv:2510.24834 [math-ph]

    work page arXiv

  72. [72]

    Symmetric Gapped States and Symmetry-Enforced Gaplessness in 3-dimension,

    A. Debray, M. Yu, and W. Ye, “Symmetric Gapped States and Symmetry-Enforced Gaplessness in 3-dimension,”arXiv:2602.12335 [hep-th]. 40

    work page arXiv

  73. [73]

    Models for gapped boundaries and domain walls

    A. Kitaev and L. Kong, “Models for Gapped Boundaries and Domain Walls,”Commun. Math. Phys.313 no. 2, (2012) 351–373,arXiv:1104.5047 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  74. [74]

    Gauging spatial symmetries and the classification of topological crystalline phases

    R. Thorngren and D. V. Else, “Gauging Spatial Symmetries and the Classification of Topological Crystalline Phases,”Phys. Rev. X8no. 1, (2018) 011040,arXiv:1612.00846 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  75. [75]

    Crystalline topological phases as defect networks

    D. V. Else and R. Thorngren, “Crystalline topological phases as defect networks,”Phys. Rev. B99no. 11, (2019) 115116,arXiv:1810.10539 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  76. [76]

    Quantization of particle transport,

    D. J. Thouless, “Quantization of particle transport,”Phys. Rev. B27(May, 1983) 6083–6087

    1983

  77. [77]

    1+1d SPT phases with fusion category symmetry: interface modes and non-abelian Thouless pump,

    K. Inamura and S. Ohyama, “1+1d SPT phases with fusion category symmetry: interface modes and non-abelian Thouless pump,”arXiv:2408.15960 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page arXiv

  78. [78]

    Kramers-Wannier-like Duality Defects in (3+1)D Gauge Theories,

    J. Kaidi, K. Ohmori, and Y. Zheng, “Kramers-Wannier-like Duality Defects in (3+1)D Gauge Theories,” Phys. Rev. Lett.128no. 11, (2022) 111601,arXiv:2111.01141 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2022

  79. [79]

    Topological Operators and Completeness of Spectrum in Discrete Gauge Theories,

    T. Rudelius and S.-H. Shao, “Topological Operators and Completeness of Spectrum in Discrete Gauge Theories,”JHEP12(2020) 172,arXiv:2006.10052 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2020

  80. [80]

    Symmetries and strings of adjoint QCD2,

    Z. Komargodski, K. Ohmori, K. Roumpedakis, and S. Seifnashri, “Symmetries and strings of adjoint QCD2,”JHEP03(2021) 103,arXiv:2008.07567 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2021

Showing first 80 references.