Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:math/9911239 · Communications in Mathematical Physics

Modular Invariants from Subfactors:¶Type I Coupling Matrices and Intermediate Subfactors

Jens Böckenhauer, David E. Evans

Published Sep 1, 2000• 43 citations
arXivHTMLPDF
DOI
10.1007/s002200000241

Related papers

Multi-Interval Subfactors and Modularity¶of Representations in Conformal Field Theory

Yasuyuki Kawahigashi, Roberto Longo, Michael Müger

arXiv:math/9903104•Communications in Mathematical Physics•Jun 1, 2001•222 citations

Modular invariants from simple currents. An explicit proof

A.N. Schellekens, Shimon Yankielowicz B

Physics Letters B•Aug 1, 1989•80 citations

Modular invariants from subfactors: Type I coupling matrices and intermediate subfactors

Jens Böckenhauer, David Evans

A braided subfactor determines a coupling matrix Z which commutes with the S- and T-matrices arising from the braiding. Such a coupling matrix is not necessarily of “type I”, i.e. in general it does not have a block-diagonal structure which can be reinterpreted as the diagonal coupling matrix with respect to a suitable extension. We show that there are always two intermediate subfactors which correspond to left and right maximal extensions and which determine “parent ” coupling matrices Z ± of type I. Moreover it is shown that if the intermediate subfactors coincide, so that Z + = Z − , then Z is related to Z + by an automorphism of the extended fusion rules. The intertwining relations of chiral branching coefficients between original and extended S- and T-matrices are also clarified. None of our results depends on non-degeneracy of the braiding, i.e. the S- and T-matrices need not be modular. Examples from SO(n) current algebra models illustrate that the parents can be different, Z + ̸ = Z − , and that Z need not be related to a type I invariant by such an automorphism. 1

•Jan 1, 2000•57 citations

Critical Phenomena, modular invariants and operator algebras

David Evans

We review the framework subfactors provide for understanding modular invariants. We discuss the structure of a generalized Longo-Rehren subfactor and the relationship between the coupling matrices of such subfactors, modular invariance and local extensions. We relate results of Kostant, in the context of the McKay correspondence for finite subgroups of SU(2), to subfactors. A direct proof of how alpha-induction produces modular invariants is presented.

arXiv:math/0204281•Apr 23, 2002•17 citations

From tensor products to the modular matrix S and back

Jürgen Fuchs

Presented at•Jan 1, 1991•0 citations

New subfactors associated with closed systems of sectors

Karl-Henning Rehren

A theorem is derived which (i) provides a new class of subfactors which may be interpreted as generalized asymptotic subfactors, and which (ii) ensures the existence of two-dimensional local quantum field theories associated with certain modular invariant matrices.

arXiv:math/9911148•Nov 19, 1999•1 citation
A braided subfactor determines a coupling matrix Z which commutes with the S- and T-matrices arising from the braiding. Such a coupling matrix is not necessarily of “type I”, i.e. in general it does not have a block-diagonal structure which can be reinterpreted as the diagonal coupling matrix with respect to a suitable extension. We show that there are always two intermediate subfactors which correspond to left and right maximal extensions and which determine “parent ” coupling matrices Z ± of type I. Moreover it is shown that if the intermediate subfactors coincide, so that Z + = Z − , then Z is related to Z + by an automorphism of the extended fusion rules. The intertwining relations of chiral branching coefficients between original and extended S- and T-matrices are also clarified. None of our results depends on non-degeneracy of the braiding, i.e. the S- and T-matrices need not be modular. Examples from SO(n) current algebra models illustrate that the parents can be different, Z + ̸ = Z − , and that Z need not be related to a type I invariant by such an automorphism. 1