
==== Front
Nat Commun
Nat Commun
Nature Communications
2041-1723
Nature Publishing Group UK London

39266544
52320
10.1038/s41467-024-52320-7
Article
Emergent (2+1)D topological orders from iterative (1+1)D gauging
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1845-7554
Garre-Rubio José jgarrerubio@gmail.com

https://ror.org/03prydq77 grid.10420.37 0000 0001 2286 1424 University of Vienna, Faculty of Mathematics, Oskar-Morgenstern-Platz 1, 1090 Vienna, Austria
12 9 2024
12 9 2024
2024
15 798615 5 2024
3 9 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
Gauging introduces gauge fields in order to localize an existing global symmetry, resulting in a dual global symmetry on the gauge fields that can be gauged again. By iterating the gauging process on spin chains with Abelian group symmetries and arranging the gauge fields in a 2D lattice, the local symmetries become the stabilizer of the XZZX-code for any Abelian group. By twisting the gauging map, we obtain codes that explicitly confine anyons, whose local creating operators violate an odd number of plaquettes. Their fusion results in either mobile dipole excitations twisting only half of the plaquette terms, or complete immobile Sierpiński-like excitations if we twist all the terms. Our construction naturally realizes any gapped boundary by taking different quantum phases of the initial (1+1)D globally symmetric system. In addition, our method also establishes a promising route to obtain higherdimensional topological codes from lower ones and to identify their gapped boundaries and their tensor network representations.

Here, it is shown how two-dimensional physics can emerge from its one-dimensional boundary. The 2D topological order comes from the concatenation of gauging maps of 1D global symmetries.

Subject terms

Topological matter
Theoretical physics
issue-copyright-statement© Springer Nature Limited 2024
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Gauging is fundamental in the Standard Model to comprehend and unify forces. It transforms a system, promoting its global symmetry to a local symmetry by introducing new degrees of freedom known as gauge fields. While the initial motivation for gauging was Lagrangians supported on the continuum with Lie group symmetries, the gauging of quantum lattice Hamiltonians with finite group symmetries has gained significant attention1–3.

The power of gauging lies in the fact that it connects very distinct phases of matter, which makes it the standard tool to classify quantum phases and to prove the existence of anomalies4–6. Since gauging global (1+1)D symmetries results in emergent dual global symmetries (which could be non-invertible for non-Abelian groups7,8) this turns gauging into the source of dualities in (1+1)D9. In (2+1)D, the emergent symmetries give rise to a very rich phenomena including 1-form and surface symmetries10. Gauging has also been generalized to other settings beyond on-site global symmetries, including non-on-site global symmetries11 and higher form symmetries6,12–14, leading to the creation of fractal phases15,16.

All previous gauging and duality setups relate systems in the same physical dimension. In this work, we use gauging to establish a bulk–boundary correspondence: the construction of a (2+1)D topologically ordered system (with local symmetries) from (1+1)D globally symmetric systems.

To achieve this, we iteratively gauge the emergent 1D global symmetries of the new gauge fields for finite Abelian groups. Since the corresponding matter fields are not discarded at every step, we arrange them as the horizontal layers of the newly constructed 2D lattice. Unexpectedly, the local symmetries from each gauging, modified by the composition of the subsequent maps, become the stabilizers of the generalization of the XZZX-code17(a realization of the toric code18 proposed in19) for any Abelian group. By twisting the gauging map by a 2-cocycle20,21, we explicitly confined anyons that now violate an odd number of plaquette terms and whose fusion results in mobile dipoles or completely immobile Sierpiński-like excitations.

The different gapped boundaries (and hence the condensable anyons at the boundary) of our construction depend on the quantum phase of the initial (1+1)D globally symmetric system. We show this by establishing a connection between boundary Hamiltonian terms and (1+1)D string order parameters evaluated on the initial system. Such connection illuminates the fact that both settings, gapped boundaries of quantum doubles of G and (1+1)D quantum phases with global symmetries, are classified by the same mathematical object.

Since the gauging operator is a tensor network, our 2D construction inherits that structure, giving rise to a subfamily of projected entangled pair states (PEPS)22 that we refer to as projected entangled pair emergent states (PEPES) that satisfy a different version of the virtual symmetry leading to topological ordered PEPS23,24.

While preparing this manuscript, Ref. 25 appears where D + 1-dimensional qubit Hamiltonians are constructed by coupling D-dimensional Hamiltonians with multiple Z2 symmetries and their dual models by using generalized Kramers–Wannier dualities. We are not limited to qubit systems nor to order two symmetries.

Results

Gauging

The procedure of gauging maps globally symmetric operators and states {O,ψ}, to local symmetric ones {O^,∣ψ^⟩} such that it preserves their expectation values: ⟨ψ∣O∣ψ⟩=⟨ψ^∣O^∣ψ^⟩. It has been proven3,15 that the gauging of a Hamiltonian with its zero gauge coupling limit can preserve the gap and the ground subspace.

The map is implemented by a gauging operator G02, that maps the initial matter Hilbert space H0 to H0⊗H1, introducing new degrees of freedom (dof) supported in H1, called the gauge fields. Given a global symmetry of a finite Abelian group G represented as ⊗iugi in H0, where g ∈ G and i denotes the vertices of a 1D chain, the new introduced Hilbert space is H1=⊗i^C[G]i^, where i^ denotes the edge between i and i + 1 and C[G]=span{g,g∈G}. We define in C[G] the unitary representation of G{Xg}g∈G as Xgh=gh that allows to construct the local symmetry projectors Pi=1∣G∣∑g∈GXg−1i^−1⊗ugi⊗Xgi^. Then the global projector to the local symmetric subspace is P=ΠiPi such that the gauging operator is defined by G0=P(⊗i^ei^), where e denotes the trivial group element and it satisfies1 Xg−1i^−1,1⋅ugi,0⋅Xgi^,1G0=G0∀g∈G,∀i,

where j = 0, 1 denotes the action on Hj.

Finally gauged states are given by ∣ψ^⟩=G0∣ψ⟩ and gauge operators by O^⋅G0=G0⋅O. As an example let us consider the transverse-field Ising model H = − J(∑iXiXi+1 + gZi) with global symmetry ⊗iZi that it is mapped under gauging to H^=−J(∑iXiZi^Xi+1+gZi) with local symmetry Xi^−1ZiXi^ and an emergent global symmetry ⊗i^Zi^ only supported on the gauge fields. Importantly, as we will show next, this emergent global symmetry is always present after gauging.

The emergent global dual symmetry

Let us define the operator Zg^=∑hg^(h)hh, associated to an irrep g^:G→U(1) of G, satisfying Xg⋅Zg^=g^(g−1)⋅Zg^⋅Xg. Then, the global operator ⊗i^Zg^i^,1 commutes with the local symmetry of (1), so it does with Pi, and it is a global symmetry of ⊗i^ei^. Therefore, the gauged operators and the gauged states endow the following emergent dual global symmetry:2 ⊗i^Zg^i^,1⋅G0=G0∀g^∈G^,

where the unitary operators {Zg^} are a representation of the dual group G^ of the irreps. In the Supplementary Note 1 we show that for non-Abelian groups the emergent global symmetry is Rep(G) and it comes from the zero gauge flux configuration.

In the literature, gauging also involves decoupling and projecting out the matter, resulting in just gauge fields with a global symmetry, which can be understood as a duality process. In the example, the decoupling process maps H^→H~=−J(∑iZi^+gXi^−1Xi^), since Zi→Xi^−1Xi^ using the local symmetry XZX, which corresponds to the Kramers–Wannier duality26.

Iterative Abelian gauging

The emergent global G^ symmetry can be gauged as well. To do so we construct the gauging map G1:H1→H1⊗H2 by first introducing H2=⊗iC[G^]i, defining the unitary representation of G^{Xg^}g^∈G^ as Xg^∣h^⟩=∣g^h^⟩, and then projecting ⊗ie^i,2 onto the local symmetric subspace of Xg^−1i,2⊗Zg^i^,1⊗Xg^i,2. After composing both gauging maps G1∘G0:H0→H0⊗H1⊗H2, the initial local symmetry of G0, see (1), changes to3 Xg−1i^−1,1⋅Zg−1i,2⋅ugi,0⋅Xgi^,1⋅G1∘G0=G1∘G0,

where Zg=∑h^h^(g)∣h^⟩⟨h^∣ is a representation of G on C[G^] and it satisfies Zg⋅Xg^=g^(g)⋅Xg^⋅Zg. To get Eq. (3) we just have to check that G1(Xg†⊗Xg)=(Xg†⊗Zg†⊗Xg)G1 which is how two point symmetric correlation functions (of the global symmetry G^) maps through gauging to string order parameters (of the global symmetry G):4 Xgi,j⋅Xg†i′,j→G1Xgi,j⋅∏i≤k<i′Zgk^,j+1⋅Xg†i′,j.

See Fig. 1 for an sketch. Again, there is an emergent global symmetry of G after gauging with G1 realized by Zg acting on H2.Fig. 1 Sketch of the iterative gauging for G=Z2.

a The global symmetry generated by Z ⊗N is gauged to a local X ⊗ Z ⊗ X symmetry and a global Z ⊗N on the gauge fields. b Emergent local symmetries after applying the second gauging map.

Therefore, we can iterate the gauging of the emergent global symmetries defining Gj:Hj→Hj⊗Hj+1 and compose M gauging maps:5 G≡GM−1∘⋯∘G1∘G0:H0→⊗j=0MHj,

where G0 is related to Gj≡Ge by ug ↔ Zg with j even and G1=Gj≡Go when j odd.

2D lattice from iterative 1D gauging

We place every new Hilbert space Hj+1 coming from Gj:Hj→Hj⊗Hj+1, on the next layer of a 2D array. Every local Hilbert space C[G] will be on the vertices {i}, and C[G^] on the edges {i^} (placed between i and i + 1). This creates a rotated squared lattice with the following symmetries:Xg−1i^−1,j⋅Zg−1i,j+1⋅Zgi,j−1⋅Xgi^,j⋅G=G,joddXg^−1i−1,j⋅Zg^−1i^,j+1⋅Zg^i^,j−1⋅Xg^i,j⋅G=G,jeven

see Fig. 2. These local symmetries commute since [Zg†⊗Xg,Xg^†⊗Zg^]=0. Remarkably, for G=Z2 they are the stabilizers of the XZZX-code17, which is a different realization of the toric code18,19.Fig. 2 Main operators on the emergent 2D system.

a Commuting bulk Hamiltonian terms. b Generic boundary term. c Vertical anyon given by g ∈ G that could condense on the boundary. d Concatenation of horizontal and vertical anyons given by g^∈G^.

So our state G is a common (+1) eigenstate of the aforementioned commuting stabilizer terms which can be seen as the ground state of the topological code Hamiltonian:6

Therefore, we have constructed the generalization of the XZZX-code for any Abelian group G by using the emergent symmetries of the concatenation of (1 + 1)D gauging operators.

HG,bulkEmerg. commutes with {⊗i^Zg^i^,j}joddg^ and {⊗iZgi,j}jeveng, the emergent global symmetries of the ground state G, which correspond to the horizontal logical operators. The vertical logical operators are {⊗j^Xg^i^,j^}i^g^ and {⊗jXgi,j}ig, that applied to G generate the ∣G∣2 ground states of HG,bulkEmerg..

Twisting the bulk

The gauging map can be twisted, as introduced in ref. 21, by a 2-cocycle α∈H2[G,U(1)]. To do so we introduce the α and α¯ projective representations Xgα and X~gα¯ defined by Xgαh=α(g,h)gh and X~gα¯h=α¯(hg−1,g)hg−1. These two representations commute so we construct Pα=∣G∣−1∑g∈GX~gα¯⊗Zg⊗Xgα and define Gα=∏iPαi⊗i^ei^. Importantly the twisted gauging operator also realizes the same emergent dual symmetry of G^: ⊗i^Zg^i^⋅Gα=Gα since the operators satisfy Zg^⋅Xgα=g^(g)⋅Xgα⋅Zg^.

For untwisted gauging maps on odd layers, the emergent Hamiltonian resulting from concatenating GoGα, shares the G^-plaquette terms of (6). However, G-plaquette terms are now:7

where ıgα (the so-called slant product) belongs to G^ since 𝚤gα(h)=α(g,h)α(h,g) and where we have used Xgα⋅X~gα¯=Z𝚤gα. The fact that the product of all G-plaquette terms is the product of the horizontal G^-logical operators, Eq. (7), and not the identity has several consequences. First, the only logical vertical operators are {⊗j^Xg^i^,j^}i^g^, since {⊗jXgi,j}ig do not commute with Bgα. Then the former generate just a ∣G∣-fold ground space: the topological order has changed. Second, there are local operators, Xgα and X~gα¯, that violate (depicted as a red dot) an odd number of plaquettes, see Fig. 3a.Fig. 3 Twisted operators and their excitations.

a G-twisted operators violating three plaquette terms depicted in red. b G^-twisted operators violating three plaquette terms depicted in red. c Combining twisted operators with the shape of the Sierpiński triangle, acting on the blue vertices, excitations on the red plaquettes are created.

These excitations are confined creating strings whose energy grow with their length. But gluing them together X~gα¯⊗Xgα, a dipole excitation is created that moves free vertically. One can bend the dipole excitation by acting with Zg horizontally, leaving an excitation on the corner or splitting the excitation on to right and left. Notice that the dipole commutes with the horizontal Zg^-string excitations: so these two kind of excitations braid trivially. The only remaining anyons are vertical Xg^-strings and horizontal Zg-strings that braid non-trivially.

We can also twist the odd layers by β∈H2[G^,U(1)] where the local excitations are created by Xg^β and X~g^β¯, depicted in Fig. 3b. The combine action of Xg^β and Xgα with the shape of the Sierpiński fractal generate excitations at its corners, see Fig. 3c. We note that twisting all the layers reduces drastically the topological order (depending on α and β).

Boundary conditions

In this section we consider periodic boundary conditions (PBC) in the horizontal direction by using PBC gauging operators—see Supplementary Note 3 on how to define the gauging map with open boundary conditions (OBC). We also take ug = Zg for simplicity. The vertical boundaries of G, see Eq. (5), correspond to the input Hilbert space H0 and the last gauge fields introduced HM.

The case of PBC on the vertical boundaries correspond to the state TrH0=HM[G]∈⊗j=1M−1Hj, whenever M is even, which results in a square rotated lattice in a torus.

For vertical OBC, we close the boundaries with the states ψ∈H0 and ψ′∈HM which are globally symmetric under G (or G^ for the case of ψ′ if M is odd). Therefore, the resulting state is ψ′Gψ∈⊗j=1M−1Hj.

There are two kind of boundary terms that commute with the bulk stabilizers. The first one can be chosen to be (see Fig. 2)8 X~g^β¯⊗Zg^†⊗Xg^β,β∈H2[G^,U(1)],

and the second one corresponds to single Zg acting on the first layer. The first type affects the anyons labeled by G and the second influences the anyons indexed by G^.

The appearance of the boundary terms as symmetries of ψ′Gψ will be determined by the quantum phases of ψ and ψ′. Let us first describe the situation for the first type of boundary terms. If we concatenate ℓ of these terms its action on ψ through G is X~g^β¯⊗Z𝚤g^β⊗ℓ⊗Xg^β. So the term of Eq. (8) is a symmetry of Gψ only if ψX~g^β¯⊗Z𝚤g^β⊗ℓ⊗Xg^βψ=1. This corresponds to the expectation value of this string order parameter for the global symmetry ⊗iZgi, whose value depends on the quantum phase of ψ viewed as one of the ground states of a 1D symmetric Hamiltonian Hψ1D. Therefore, the quantum phase of the 1D boundary determines which boundary stabilizer are present and then which anyons condense at the boundary (by commuting with all Hamiltonian terms in the boundary).

Remarkably our construction unifies the fact that the mathematical object that classifies both gapped boundaries of quantum double models of G27–29 and globally G symmetric 1D systems30,31 is the same: module categories over VecG32 given by pairs (H⊆G,β∈H2[H,U(1)]).

Incorporating the second type of boundaries, the condition to be a symmetry of ψ′Gψ is that Zg is also a local symmetry for ψ (provided that it generates its global symmetry ⊗iZgi).

Let us analyze in detail the case of β = 1 where the boundary terms are Xg^†⊗Zg^†⊗Xg^ so we evaluate ψXg^†,i⊗Xg^i+ℓψ, a two point symmetric correlation function that characterizes the pattern of symmetry breaking. If H ⊆ G is the unbroken symmetry group characterizing the quantum phase of Hψ1D, generically ψ(Xg^i⊗Xg^†i′)ψ≠0 if g^(h)=1 for all h ∈ H. We further impose that ψ(Xg^i⊗Xg^†i′)ψ=1 which is achieved at the RG fixed point, see the Supplementary Note 2 for an explicit construction. So the boundary symmetries of the first type correspond to the elements g^ in the subgroup resHG^⊆G^, where resHG^={g^∈G^∣g^(H)=1}.

Finally, we can construct the associated boundary Hamiltonian as:9

whose first kind of terms are violated only by anyons created by string operators ⊗j∈ℓXgi^,j ending in the boundary with g ∈ G⧹H, see Fig. 2c. The second kind of terms are violated by anyons indexed by g^∈G^ such that g^(g)≠1 for all g ∈ G satisfying that Zgψ=ψ.

As an example we can take ψ=⊗ie^i which belongs to the trivial symmetric phase: (H = G, β = 1) and it is also locally symmetric under Zg for all g ∈ G. In this case only G-anyons condense at the boundary.

The same discussion could have been applied if we would have started from a G^ global symmetry and also to last layer ψ′ of ψ′Gψ.

Tensor network description

The gauging operators, Go,e in odd and even layers, are matrix product operators constructed from two tensors (see Supplementary Note 3) of bond dimension ∣G∣:

Then, the state G in (5) is a projected entangled pair state (PEPS)22 emerging from the concatenation of 1D gauging operators. Subsequently, we dub this subfamily of PEPS as projected entangled pair emergent states (PEPES). The two different tensors, corresponding to the two types of vertices in the rotated squared checkboard lattice of the PEPES (see Fig. 2) have the following symmetries:

The first three relations of each tensor correspond to the virtual G and G^-invariance characterizing 2D topological order in PEPS23,24 and the last relations makes compatible those symmetries. Note that the virtual loop symmetries propagates only in the horizontal direction.

Another view on our construction

We can interpret G as the projection of stacked layers of 1D product states. By using that Gj=Pj⊗ieji we can writeG=∏j=1P2j⋅P2j−1P0ψ⊗j⊗i^e2ji^⊗ie^2j−1i,

where ⊗i^ei^ is locally invariant under any Zgi^ and the projectors P2j and P2j−1 do not commute. The two previous properties differ from the common approach of creating topologically ordered models from stacking lower dimensional ones (where the coupling generally commutes)33–38.

Discussion

In this work we have established a bulk–boundary correspondence between 1D global symmetric systems and 2D topologically ordered models. We do so by sequentially gauging the emergent 1D global symmetries that maps the local 1D symmetries after gauging to 2D plaquette operators. As a result we obtain a family of 2D Hamiltonians:HEmerg.G=Hbulkα,γ+Hbdry.[ψ].

This family covers the generalization of the XZZX-code for any Abelian group G. Also, these Hamiltonians are able to realize interesting anyon confinement phenomena where there are local excitations violating 3 plaquette terms. Moreover, the boundary terms are given by the quantum phase of the 1D Hamiltonian of ψ and determines which anyons condense at the boundary. Such connection illuminates the fact that both settings are classified by the same mathematical object.

The question of how our construction can be generalized to non-Abelian topological orders remains open. We left for future work the emergence of non-trivial (3+1)D phases from the gauging of (2+1)D symmetries.

Methods

The main relations used in the analytical calculations are Zg⋅Xg^=g^(g)⋅Xg^⋅Zg and Xg⋅Zg^=g^(g−1)⋅Zg^⋅Xg for any g ∈ G and g^∈G^. These relations allow us to compute how the different operators translate through the gauging maps.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Peer Review File

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1038/s41467-024-52320-7.

Acknowledgements

The author thanks David Blanik for the discussion that inspired this work, Bram Vancraeynest-De Cuiper, Aleksander Kubicki, Anasuya Lyons, Benjamin J. Brown and Isabel Miranda for their helpful comments on the manuscript and Dominic Williamson for pointing out ref. 25. Open access funding provided by University of Vienna.

Author contributions

Everything done by J.G.R.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Communications thanks the anonymous, reviewers for their contribution to the peer review of this work. A peer review file is available.

Data availability

The author declares that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the paper.

Competing interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
==== Refs
References

1. Levin, M. & Gu, Z.-C. Braiding statistics approach to symmetry-protected topological phases. Phys. Rev. B 86, 115109 (2012).
2. Haegeman J Van Acoleyen K Schuch N Cirac JI Verstraete F Gauging quantum states: from global to local symmetries in many-body systems Phys. Rev. 2015 X5 011024 10.1103/PhysRevX.5.011024
Haegeman, J., Van Acoleyen, K., Schuch, N., Cirac, J. I. & Verstraete, F. Gauging quantum states: from global to local symmetries in many-body systems. Phys. Rev. X5, 011024 (2015).10.1103/PhysRevX.5.011024
3. Williamson DJ Matrix product operators for symmetry-protected topological phases: Gauging and edge theories Phys. Rev. B 2016 94 205150 10.1103/PhysRevB.94.205150
Williamson, D. J. et al. Matrix product operators for symmetry-protected topological phases: Gauging and edge theories. Phys. Rev. B 94, 205150 (2016).10.1103/PhysRevB.94.205150
4. Barkeshli, M., Bonderson, P., Cheng, M. & Wang, Z. Symmetry fractionalization, defects, and gauging of topological phases. Phys. Rev. B 100, 115147 (2019).
5. Thorngren, R. & von Keyserlingk, C. Higher spt’s and a generalization of anomaly in-flow. Preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/1511.02929 (2015).
6. Yoshida, B. Topological phases with generalized global symmetries. Phys. Rev. B 93, 155131 (2016).
7. Gaiotto, D., Kapustin, A., Seiberg, N. & Willett, B. Generalized global symmetries. J. High Energy Phys. 2015, 172 (2015).
8. Bhardwaj, L. & Tachikawa, Y. On finite symmetries and their gauging in two dimensions. J. High Energy Phys. 2018, 189 (2018).
9. Lootens, L., Delcamp, C., Ortiz, G. & Verstraete, F. Dualities in one-dimensional quantum lattice models: Symmetric hamiltonians and matrix product operator intertwiners. PRX Quantum 4, 020357 (2023).
10. Delcamp, C. & Tiwari, A. Higher categorical symmetries and gauging in two-dimensional spin systems. SciPost Phys. 16, 110 (2024).
11. Garre-Rubio, J. & Kull, I. Gauging quantum states with nonanomalous matrix product operator symmetries. Phys. Rev. B 107, 075137 (2023).
12. Shirley, W., Slagle, K. & Chen, X. Foliated fracton order from gauging subsystem symmetries. SciPost Phys. 6, 041 (2019).
13. Moradi, H., Aksoy, Ö. M., Bardarson, J. H. & Tiwari, A. Symmetry fractionalization, mixed-anomalies and dualities in quantum spin models with generalized symmetries. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.01266 (2023).
14. Rayhaun BC Williamson DJ Higher-form subsystem symmetry breaking: Subdimensional criticality and fracton phase transitions SciPost Phys. 2023 15 017 10.21468/SciPostPhys.15.1.017
Rayhaun, B. C. & Williamson, D. J. Higher-form subsystem symmetry breaking: Subdimensional criticality and fracton phase transitions. SciPost Phys. 15, 017 (2023).10.21468/SciPostPhys.15.1.017
15. Williamson, D. J. Fractal symmetries: Ungauging the cubic code. Phys. Rev. B 94, 155128 (2016).
16. Vijay, S., Haah, J. & Fu, L. Fracton topological order, generalized lattice gauge theory, and duality. Phys. Rev. B 94, 235157 (2016).
17. Bonilla Ataides, J. P., Tuckett, D. K., Bartlett, S. D., Flammia, S. T. & Brown, B. J. The xzzx surface code. Nat. Commun. 12, 2172 (2021).
18. Kitaev A Fault-tolerant quantum computation by anyons Ann. Phys. 2003 303 2 30 10.1016/S0003-4916(02)00018-0
Kitaev, A. Fault-tolerant quantum computation by anyons. Ann. Phys. 303, 2–30 (2003).10.1016/S0003-4916(02)00018-0
19. Wen, X.-G. Quantum orders in an exact soluble model. Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 016803 (2003).
20. Ryan Thorngren, Y. W. Fusion category symmetry i: Anomaly in-flow and gapped phases. Preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/1912.02817 (2019).
21. Blanik, D., Garre-Rubio, J. & Schuch, N. In preparation.
22. Verstraete, F. & Cirac, J. I. Renormalization algorithms for quantum-many body systems in two and higher dimensions. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0407066 (2004).
23. Schuch N Poilblanc D Cirac JI Pérez-García D Resonating valence bond states in the peps formalism Phys. Rev. B 2012 86 115108 10.1103/PhysRevB.86.115108
Schuch, N., Poilblanc, D., Cirac, J. I. & Pérez-García, D. Resonating valence bond states in the peps formalism. Phys. Rev. B 86, 115108 (2012).10.1103/PhysRevB.86.115108
24. Şahinoğlu MB Characterizing topological order with matrix product operators Ann. Henri Poincaré 2021 22 563 592 10.1007/s00023-020-00992-4
Şahinoğlu, M. B. et al. Characterizing topological order with matrix product operators. Ann. Henri Poincaré 22, 563–592 (2021).10.1007/s00023-020-00992-4
25. Liu, S. & Ji, W. Towards non-invertible anomalies from generalized ising models. SciPost Phys. 15, 150 (2023).
26. Kramers HA Wannier GH Statistics of the two-dimensional ferromagnet. part i Phys. Rev. 1941 60 252 262 10.1103/PhysRev.60.252
Kramers, H. A. & Wannier, G. H. Statistics of the two-dimensional ferromagnet. part i. Phys. Rev. 60, 252–262 (1941).10.1103/PhysRev.60.252
27. Kitaev, A. & Kong, L. Models for gapped boundaries and domain walls. Commun. Math. Phys. 313, 351–373 (2012).
28. Beigi S Shor PW Whalen D The quantum double model with boundary: condensations and symmetries Commun. Math. Phys. 2011 306 663 694 10.1007/s00220-011-1294-x
Beigi, S., Shor, P. W. & Whalen, D. The quantum double model with boundary: condensations and symmetries. Commun. Math. Phys. 306, 663–694 (2011).10.1007/s00220-011-1294-x
29. Kong L Wen X-G Zheng H Boundary-bulk relation in topological orders Nucl. Phys. B 2017 922 62 76 10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2017.06.023
Kong, L., Wen, X.-G. & Zheng, H. Boundary-bulk relation in topological orders. Nucl. Phys. B 922, 62–76 (2017).10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2017.06.023
30. Schuch N Pérez-García D Cirac I Classifying quantum phases using matrix product states and projected entangled pair states Phys. Rev. B 2011 84 165139 10.1103/PhysRevB.84.165139
Schuch, N., Pérez-García, D. & Cirac, I. Classifying quantum phases using matrix product states and projected entangled pair states. Phys. Rev. B 84, 165139 (2011).10.1103/PhysRevB.84.165139
31. Chen X Gu Z-C Wen X-G Classification of gapped symmetric phases in one-dimensional spin systems Phys. Rev. B 2011 83 035107 10.1103/PhysRevB.83.035107
Chen, X., Gu, Z.-C. & Wen, X.-G. Classification of gapped symmetric phases in one-dimensional spin systems. Phys. Rev. B 83, 035107 (2011).10.1103/PhysRevB.83.035107
32. Ostrik, V. Module categories, weak hopf algebras and modular invariants. Preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/math/0111139 (2001).
33. Kane CL Mukhopadhyay R Lubensky TC Fractional quantum hall effect in an array of quantum wires Phys. Rev. Lett. 2002 88 036401 10.1103/PhysRevLett.88.036401 11801075
Kane, C. L., Mukhopadhyay, R. & Lubensky, T. C. Fractional quantum hall effect in an array of quantum wires. Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 036401 (2002).11801075 10.1103/PhysRevLett.88.036401
34. Brown BJ Son W Kraus CV Fazio R Vedral V Generating topological order from a two-dimensional cluster state using a duality mapping N. J. Phys. 2011 13 065010 10.1088/1367-2630/13/6/065010
Brown, B. J., Son, W., Kraus, C. V., Fazio, R. & Vedral, V. Generating topological order from a two-dimensional cluster state using a duality mapping. N. J. Phys. 13, 065010 (2011).10.1088/1367-2630/13/6/065010
35. Neupert, T., Chamon, C., Mudry, C. & Thomale, R. Wire deconstructionism of two-dimensional topological phases. Phys. Rev. B 90, 205101 (2014).
36. Williamson DJ Devakul T Type-II fractons from coupled spin chains and layers Phys. Rev. B 2021 103 155140 10.1103/PhysRevB.103.155140
Williamson, D. J. & Devakul, T. Type-II fractons from coupled spin chains and layers. Phys. Rev. B 103, 155140 (2021).10.1103/PhysRevB.103.155140
37. Tantivasadakarn, N., Thorngren, R., Vishwanath, A. & Verresen, R. Long-range entanglement from measuring symmetry-protected topological phases. Phys. Rev. X 14, 021040 (2024).
38. Williamson DJ Cheng M Designer non-abelian fractons from topological layers Phys. Rev. B 2023 107 035103 10.1103/PhysRevB.107.035103
Williamson, D. J. & Cheng, M. Designer non-abelian fractons from topological layers. Phys. Rev. B 107, 035103 (2023).10.1103/PhysRevB.107.035103
