AG-2025.12-1295·cond-mat.str-el·cross-listed: cond-mat.stat-mechhep-thquant-ph
Non-Invertible Interfaces Between Symmetry-Enriched Critical Phases
Authors
- Saranesh Prembabu
- Shu-Heng Shao
- Ruben Verresen
Abstract
Gapless quantum phases can become distinct when internal symmetries are enforced, in analogy with gapped symmetry-protected topological (SPT) phases. However, this distinction does not always lead to protected edge modes, raising the question of how the bulk-boundary correspondence is generalized to gapless cases. We propose that the spatial interface between gapless phases -- rather than their boundaries -- provides a more robust fingerprint. We show that whenever two 1+1d conformal field theories (CFTs) differ in symmetry charge assignments of local operators or twisted sectors, any symmetry-preserving spatial interface between the theories must flow to a non-invertible defect. We illustrate this general result for different versions of the Ising CFT with $\mathbb{Z}_2 \times \mathbb{Z}_2^T$ symmetry, obtaining a complete classification of allowed conformal interfaces. When the Ising CFTs differ by nonlocal operator charges, the interface hosts 0+1d symmetry-breaking phases with finite-size splittings scaling as $1/L^3$, as well as continuous phase transitions between them. For general gapless phases differing by an SPT entangler, the interfaces between them can be mapped to conformal defects with a certain defect 't Hooft anomaly. This classification also gives implications for higher-dimensional examples, including symmetry-enriched variants of the 2+1d Ising CFT. Our results establish a physical indicator for symmetry-enriched criticality through symmetry-protected interfaces, giving a new handle on the interplay between topology and gapless phases.
Submitted
29 December 20253 months ago
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2512.23706
Chat with this PDF
Ask questions, probe assumptions, request a plain-English summary. Answers cite sections from the preprint itself.
Community
Questions and answers about this paper from other readers. No formal peer review — just a place to think out loud.