Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Categorical Fermionic Actions and Minimal Modular Extensions

César Galindo, César F. Venegas-Ramírez

TL;DR

This work develops a comprehensive obstruction-theoretic framework for when braided fusion categories admit minimal non-degenerate extensions, distinguishing modularizable (Tannakian) and non-modularizable (super-Tannakian) centers. By de-equivariantizing with respect to the maximal central Tannakian subcategory and introducing fermionic actions of finite super-groups on fermionic fusion categories, the authors reduce the extension problem to cohomological data, notably an $H^4$-anomaly $O_4$ and fermionic liftings governed by $O_3$. The main result states that a modularizable Braided fusion category $\\mathcal{B}$ has a minimal non-degenerate extension iff $O_4(\\mathcal{B})=0$, while a non-modularizable case requires a minimal extension of the de-equivariantized piece, a compatible fermionic super-group action, and vanishing $O_4(\\mathcal{S}^G)$. The work also provides explicit computations and examples, including Ising and rank-four pointed spin-braided categories, and situates these results alongside recent advances (e.g., JFR) in the broader program of classifying modular extensions of braided fusion categories.

Abstract

We define fermionic actions of finite super-groups on fermionic fusion categories and establish necessary and sufficient conditions for their existence. Our main result characterizes when a braided fusion category admits a minimal non-degenerate extension in terms of cohomological obstructions. This characterization for braided fusion categories with non-Tannakian Müger center involves the fermionic structures and fermionic actions introduced in this work.

Categorical Fermionic Actions and Minimal Modular Extensions

TL;DR

This work develops a comprehensive obstruction-theoretic framework for when braided fusion categories admit minimal non-degenerate extensions, distinguishing modularizable (Tannakian) and non-modularizable (super-Tannakian) centers. By de-equivariantizing with respect to the maximal central Tannakian subcategory and introducing fermionic actions of finite super-groups on fermionic fusion categories, the authors reduce the extension problem to cohomological data, notably an -anomaly and fermionic liftings governed by . The main result states that a modularizable Braided fusion category has a minimal non-degenerate extension iff , while a non-modularizable case requires a minimal extension of the de-equivariantized piece, a compatible fermionic super-group action, and vanishing . The work also provides explicit computations and examples, including Ising and rank-four pointed spin-braided categories, and situates these results alongside recent advances (e.g., JFR) in the broader program of classifying modular extensions of braided fusion categories.

Abstract

We define fermionic actions of finite super-groups on fermionic fusion categories and establish necessary and sufficient conditions for their existence. Our main result characterizes when a braided fusion category admits a minimal non-degenerate extension in terms of cohomological obstructions. This characterization for braided fusion categories with non-Tannakian Müger center involves the fermionic structures and fermionic actions introduced in this work.

Paper Structure

This paper contains 28 sections, 24 theorems, 34 equations.

Key Result

Theorem 1.1

Let $\mathcal{B}$ be a braided fusion category with non-trivial maximal central Tannakian subcategory ${\operatorname{Rep}}(G) \subseteq \mathcal{Z}_2(\mathcal{B})$. Here the $H^4$-anomaly is the cohomological obstruction defined in Definition def: H4 anolmaly, and fermionic actions of super-groups are introduced in Section acciosuper.

Theorems & Definitions (55)

  • Theorem 1.1: Theorem \ref{['theorem:teorema de-equivariantización y extensiones']}
  • Remark 1.2
  • Example 2.1: pointed braided fusion categories
  • Definition 2.2: $G$-crossed braided fusion category
  • Definition 2.3
  • Proposition 2.4: Ga1
  • Proposition 2.5: Ga1
  • Definition 3.1
  • Remark 3.2
  • Example 3.3: fermionic pointed fusion categories
  • ...and 45 more