Anomalies of <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math>-dimensional categorical symmetries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a general approach for detecting when a fusion category symmetry is anomalous, based on the existence of a special kind of Lagrangian algebra of the corresponding Drinfeld center. The Drinfeld center of a fusion category $\mathcal{A}$ describes a $(2+1)$-dimensional topological order whose gapped boundaries enumerate all $(1+1)$-dimensional gapped phases with the fusion category symmetry, which may be spontaneously broken. There always exists a gapped boundary, given by the electric Lagrangian algebra, that describes a phase with $\mathcal{A}$ fully spontaneously broken. The symmetry defects of this boundary can be identified with the objects in $\mathcal{A}$. We observe that if there exists a different gapped boundary, given by a magnetic Lagrangian algebra, then there exists a gapped phase where $\mathcal{A}$ is not spontaneously broken at all, which means that $\mathcal{A}$ is not anomalous. In certain cases, we show that requiring the existence of such a magnetic Lagrangian algebra leads to highly computable obstructions to $\mathcal{A}$ being anomaly free. As an application, we consider the Drinfeld centers of ${\mathbb{Z}}_{N}\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{\mathbb{Z}}_{N}$ Tambara-Yamagami fusion categories and recover known results from the study of fiber functors.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".