--- abstract: 'The multi-flavor $BF$ theories in (3+1) dimensions with cubic or quartic coupling are the simplest topological quantum field theories that can describe fractional braiding statistics between loop-like topological excitations (three-loop or four-loop braiding statistics). In this paper, by canonically quantizing these theories, we study the algebra of Wilson loop and Wilson surface operators, and multiplets of ground states on three torus. In particular, by quantizing these coupled $BF$ theories on the three-torus, we explicitly calculate the $\mathcal{S}$- and $\mathcal{T}$-matrices, which encode fractional braiding statistics and topological spin of loop-like excitations, respectively. In the coupled $BF$ theories with cubic and quartic coupling, the Hopf link and Borromean ring of loop excitations, together with point-like excitations, form composite particles.' author: - Apoorv Tiwari - Xiao Chen - Shinsei Ryu bibliography: - 'reference.bib' title: Wilson operator algebras and ground states of coupled BF theories --- [^1] Introduction ============ For more than three decades exotic quantum phases of matter have been extensively studied in condensed matter physics. In particular gapped systems with non-trivial topological order have been of much interest. @Wen04quantumfield Topologically ordered phases have properties such as fractional statistics, long-range entanglement, ground-state degeneracy on manifolds with non-trivial topology, and symmetry fractionalization, etc. @wen1990ground [@nayak2008non; @levin2006detecting; @kitaev2006topological; @dong2008topological; @fendley2007topological] Canonical examples are fractional quantum Hall states in 2+1 dimensions, which have been observed experimentally. At long wavelengths, topologically ordered phases of matter can be described by topological quantum field theories (TQFTs), for which all correlation functions are topological, i.e., metric independent. For example, many fractional quantum Hall states, as well as simple lattice models such as the Kitaev toric code model, @kitaev2003fault [@levin2005string; @walker20123+] can be described by the Chern-Simons topological quantum field theories. For these examples, fractional braiding statistics between quasiparticles is described in terms of Wilson lines (loops) in the TQFTs, i.e., by the correlation functions of Wilson loops forming a Hopf link in the $2+1$-dimensional spacetime. @Witten1989 The idea of fractional braiding statistics can be generalized to $3+1$ dimensions. Since particles cannot braid in three spatial dimensions or equivalently, their world-lines cannot link in $3+1$-dimensions, the simplest kind of braiding is between point-link and loop-like excitations, which can have non-trivial fractional braiding statistics. This is described by the $BF$ topological field theory and has been studied quite well. @Horowitz1989 [@Horowitz1990; @Balachandran1993; @BergeronSemenoffSzabo1995; @Szabo1998] Topological phases in $3+1$-dimensions, however, have richer possibilities in terms of the kind of braiding processes that can exist. @WangLevin2015 [@WangWen2015; @JiangMesarosRan2014; @WangLevin2014; @wang2016quantum; @wan2015twisted] In this work we explore a subset of such processes by using (3+1)-dimensional TQFTs. In particular, we study TQFTs which can be thought of as extensions of the ordinary $BF$ theory. We mainly study two kinds of extensions: The first is the $BF$ theory with a cubic deformation. More precisely, we consider multiple (two or three) copies of the $BF$ theory coupled together via a cubic term. These theories realize non-trivial statistics between three loop excitations whose spacetime world surfaces are linked together, i.e., the so-called the three-loop braiding statistics. The second is four (or more) copies of $BF$ theories coupled via quartic terms. These field theories describe four-loop braiding statistics. Similar TQFTs with cubic and quartic coupling terms have been discussed recently in the literature. @kapustin2014 [@wang2016quantum] The coupled $BF$ theories with cubic or quartic coupling can also be obtained by functionally bosonizing (or gauging) bosonic symmetry protected phase (SPT) described in Ref. . In addition to these TQFTs with a cubic or quartic coupling, we will also discuss avatars of these coupled topological field theories which are quadratic but with modified coupling to external currents. We will quantize these quadratic theories on the spatial three torus and discuss the algebra of Wilson operators over there. A salient feature of topological field theories is bulk boundary correspondence wherein ground states in the bulk Hilbert space are in one-to-one correspondence with twisted partition functions defined for the boundary field theory. In our previous work, @chen2015bulk we studied the two-copies of $BF$ theories coupled by a cubic term, but focused on the gapless surface theory and the boundary-bulk correspondence: We quantized the surface theory and explicitly calculated the partition functions under various twisted boundary conditions. In addition, by performing large diffeomorphism transformations or modular transformations on the twisted partition functions, we extracted the bulk braiding data directly from the gapless surface theory. (As a related work, see Ref. for the bulk-boundary correspondence for gapped topologically ordered surface states.) In this work we study such TQFTs describing three-loop and four-loop braiding in more detail. In particular, we will study various "bulk" properties of these TQFTs, and hence provide a complementary perspective to our previous work. Summary and outline ------------------- The summary of our main results, as well as the outline of the paper, is given as follows. Section \[Three-loop braiding theory\] is devoted to the coupled $BF$ theories realizing non-trivial three-loop braiding statistics. In Sec. \[The cubic theories\] and Sec. \[The quadratic theory\], we introduce these coupled $BF$ theories, and give an overview of their basic properties. In particular, at the classical level, one can read off from the equations of motion that Hopf links play particle-like roles in these two theories. This braiding structure is encoded in the algebra of the dynamical gauge fields in these theories. In the following Sections \[Three-loop braiding statistics\], \[Quantization on a closed spatial manifold\], and \[Wave function in terms of Wilson operators\], we quantized the quadratic $BF$ theories introduced in Sec. \[The quadratic theory\], which differ from the ordinary $BF$ theory due to their modified coupling to the quasi-vortex current. The quadratic theory has the same equations of motion as the cubic theories. Moreover, the Wilson operator algebra of the quadratic theories encodes the three-loop braiding statistics. More specifically the commutator, and triple commutator between the respective Wilson operators are relevant to the respective particle-loop, and the three-loop braiding phases (Sec. \[Three-loop braiding statistics\]). Further we quantize the quadratic three-loop braiding field theory on a spatial three torus in Sections \[Quantization on a closed spatial manifold\] and \[Wave function in terms of Wilson operators\]. We construct the multiplet of ground states of the two (or three) copies of the $BF$ theories at level $\mathrm{K}$ put on spatial three torus $T^3$, by directly constructing representations of the Wilson operator algebra. The ground state degeneracy is $\mathrm{K}^2$ (or $\mathrm{K}^3$). In Appendix \[Ground state wave functionals by geometric quantization\], an alternative construction of the ground state multiplet by using geometric quantization is given. Furthermore, by calculating various overlaps between ground states, we explicitly compute the modular $\mathcal S$ and $\mathcal T$ matrices and extract particle-loop and three-loop braiding phases from them. These agree with the braiding phases computed in our previous work from the surface theory, @chen2015bulk as well as with previous bulk calculations in the literature. @chen2015bulk [@WangLevin2015; @WangWen2015; @JiangMesarosRan2014; @WangLevin2014] Much of what is discussed in Sec. \[Three-loop braiding theory\] carries over to Sec. \[Four-loop braiding theory\], in which we discuss the coupled $BF$ theories realizing non-trivial four-loop braiding statistics. In these theories, the role played by Hopf links in three-loop braiding theories is played by Borromean rings of loop-like excitations. The role of the triple is replaced by the quadruple commutator of the Wilson operators. This carries information about four loop braiding. Finally in Sec. \[Condensation picture\], we propose condensation mechanisms by which topological field theories describing three-loop and four-loop braiding statistics may arise at long wavelengths. It is known that the simplest continuum topological field theory in $3+1$ dimensions, i.e., the $BF$ theory at level $\mathrm{K}$, describes the deconfined phase of the $\mathbb Z_{\mathrm{K}}$ gauge theory. This may arise from a parent (ultraviolet) $U(1)$ gauge theory, if the $U(1)$ gauge symmetry is Higgsed to $\mathbb Z_{\mathrm{K}}$ by the abelian Higgs mechanism. Alternatively the $BF$ theory may arise as a result of the magnetic condensation via the Julia-Toulouse mechanism. In Sec. \[Condensation picture\], we discuss how the coupled $BF$ theories realizing three- or four-loop braiding statistics may arise from ultraviolet theories by condensation of some sort. By condensing a composite of electric charge and a Hopf link between $U(1)$ field lines, it can be shown that the long wavelength effective field theory is a topological field theory that describes three-loop braiding. Alternately by condensing a composite of electric charge and a Borromean ring between $U(1)$ field lines, it can be shown that the effective field theory is a topological field theory that describes four-loop braiding. We conclude in Sec. \[Conclusion and remarks\] with a few words on open issues. Three-loop braiding theory {#Three-loop braiding theory} ========================== The cubic theories {#The cubic theories} ------------------ In our previous work, @chen2015bulk we analyzed the coupled $BF$ theory defined by the following action: $$\begin{aligned} S&= \int_{\mathcal M} \Bigg[\frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi}\delta_{IJ}b^{I}\wedge {d}a^{J} \nonumber \\ &\qquad + \frac{ \mathrm{p}_1}{4\pi^2} a^{1}\wedge a^{2}\wedge da^{2} + \frac{\mathrm{p}_2}{4\pi^2} a^{2}\wedge a^{1}\wedge da^{1} \nonumber \\ &\qquad -\delta_{IJ}b^{I}\wedge J^J_{qv} -\delta_{IJ}a^{I}\wedge J^J_{qp} \Big], \label{action 3loop}\end{aligned}$$ where $a^I$ and $b^I$ are one- and two-form gauge fields, respectively; $I,J=1,2$; $\mathcal{M}$ is the (3+1)-dimensional spacetime manifold, and we will mostly assume $\mathcal{M}=\Sigma\times \mathbb{R}$ where $\Sigma$/$\mathbb{R}$ is a spatial/temporal part of the manifold. $\mathrm{K}$ and $\mathrm{p}_{1,2}$ are the parameters of the theory; The "level" $\mathrm{K}$ is an integer, whereas $\mathrm{p}_{1,2}$ are an integer multiple of $\mathrm{K}$ and are given by $$\begin{aligned} \mathrm{p}_1 = \mathrm{q}_1 \mathrm{K}, \quad \mathrm{p}_2 = \mathrm{q}_2 \mathrm{K}, \quad \mathrm{q}_{1,2}=0, \ldots, \mathrm{K}-1.\end{aligned}$$ Finally, the three-form $J_{qp}$ and two-form $J_{qv}$ represent quasi-particle and quasi-vortex (loop-like) currents, which are treated as a non-dynamical background. For a quasi-particle whose world line is given by $\mathcal{C}\subset \mathcal{M}$, and for a quasi-vortex whose world surface is given by $\mathcal{S}\subset \mathcal{M}$, $J_{qp}$ and $J_{qv}$ are given as $$\begin{aligned} J_{qp} = \delta (\mathcal{C}), \quad J_{qv} = \delta(\mathcal{S}),\end{aligned}$$ respectively, where the delta function forms $\delta(\mathcal{C})$ and $\delta(\mathcal{S})$ are defined such that $ \int_{\mathcal{M}} \delta(\mathcal{C})\wedge A =\int_{\mathcal{C}} A $ and $ \int_{\mathcal{M}} \delta(\mathcal{S})\wedge B =\int_{\mathcal{S}}B $ for arbitrary one- and two-form $A$ and $B$, respectively. (For properties of the delta function forms, see Ref. .) The action describes topological gauge theories of various kinds with gauge group $G=\mathbb Z_{\mathrm{K}}\times \mathbb Z_{\mathrm{K}}$. Following the seminal work of Dijkgraaf and Witten, @dijkgraaf1990topological we know that topological gauge theories in $d+1$-dimensions with a discrete gauge group $G$ are classified by the group cohomology $H^{d+1}(G,U(1))$. Since $H^{4}(\mathbb Z_{\mathrm{K}}\times \mathbb Z_{\mathrm{K}},U(1))=\mathbb Z_{\mathrm{K}}\times \mathbb Z_{\mathrm{K}}$, we expect there are $\mathrm{K}^2$ distinct theories. Within the coupled $BF$ theory , these are parametrized by $\mathrm{p}_{1,2}$ (or equivalently $\mathrm{q}_{1,2}$). For later use, we record the equations of motion derived from : $$\begin{aligned} \frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi}da^{I}&= J_{qv}^{I}, \nonumber \\ \frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi}db^{I}&=-\frac{\mathrm{p}_I}{4\pi^2}a^{\bar{I}}\wedge da^{\bar{I}} +\frac{\mathrm{p}_{\bar{I}}}{2\pi^2}a^{\bar{I}}\wedge da^I \nonumber \\ & \quad -\frac{\mathrm{p}_{\bar{I}}}{4\pi^2}da^{\bar{I}}\wedge a^I + J_{qp}^I, %\nonumber \\ %\frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi}db^{2}&= %-\frac{\mathrm{p}_2}{4\pi^2}a^1\wedge da^1 %+\frac{\mathrm{p}_1}{2\pi^2}a^1\wedge da^2 %\nonumber \\ %& \quad %-\frac{\mathrm{p}_1}{4\pi^2}da^1\wedge a^2+J_{qp}^2, \label{eom_cubic}\end{aligned}$$ where we introduced the notation $\bar{1}=2$ and $\bar{2}=1$, and the repeated capital Roman indices are not summer over here. In addition to the two flavors of BF theories , we will also discuss three flavors of BF theories and couple them by introducing a cubic term. This leads to the action $$\begin{aligned} S&= \int_{\mathcal M} \Bigg[\frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi}\delta_{IJ}b^{I}\wedge {d}a^{J} + \mathrm{p} a^{1}\wedge a^{2}\wedge da^{3} \nonumber \\ &\qquad -\delta_{IJ}b^{I}\wedge J^J_{qv} -\delta_{IJ}a^{I}\wedge J^J_{qp} \Big], \label{cubic bf three flavor}\end{aligned}$$ where the flavor indices $I,J$ run over $1,2,3$. As before, $\mathrm{K}$ and $\mathrm{p}$ are the parameters of the theory. This three-flavor theory shares similar properties as the two-flavor theory , and can be discussed in parallel with the two-flavor theory. In particular, both two-flavor and three-flavor theories realize non-trivial three-loop braiding statistics. ### Gauge invariance Let us now discuss the gauge symmetries of the theory . (We will focus on infinitesimal or small gauge transformations here; we will discuss large gauge transformations in detail later.) We first switch off the coupling to currents $J_{qp}$ and $J_{qv}$. The action is invariant under $$\begin{aligned} b^{I}&\to b'^I-\frac{\mathrm{p}_{\bar{I}}}{2\pi \mathrm{K}}(a^{\bar{I}}\wedge d\varphi^I +d\varphi^{\bar{I}}\wedge a^I), \nonumber \\ %b^{2}&\to b'^2-\frac{\mathrm{p}_1}{2\pi \mathrm{K}}(a^1\wedge d\varphi^2+d\varphi^1\wedge a^2), %\nonumber \\ a^{I}&\to a'^{I}=a^{I}+d\varphi^{I}, \label{gauge3loop}\end{aligned}$$ where $\varphi^{I}$ is a scalar. This transformation is a generalization of the usual 1-form gauge symmetry that the ordinary $BF$ theory has. As in the ordinary $BF$ theory, the action is invariant under an additional 2-form gauge symmetry $$\begin{aligned} b^{I}\to b^{I}+d\zeta^{I}\end{aligned}$$ where $\zeta^I$ is a one-form. Formally, these transformations can be read off by identifying the operators that generate the Gauss law constraints. Naively it seems that the coupling to sources in Eq. is not gauge invariant. Upon gauge transformation, the source terms transform as $$\begin{aligned} & \delta_{IJ}a^{I}\wedge J_{qp}^{J} + \delta_{IJ}b^{I}\wedge J_{qv}^{J} \nonumber \\ &\longrightarrow \delta_{IJ}a^{I}\wedge J_{qp}^{J}+ \delta_{IJ}b^{I}\wedge J_{qv}^{J} \nonumber \\ &\quad +d\varphi^{1}\wedge \left[J_{qp}^1+\frac{\mathrm{p}_2}{\mathrm{K}^2}d^{-1}J_{qv}^2\wedge J_{qv}^{1} -\frac{\mathrm{p}_1}{\mathrm{K}^2}d^{-1}J_{qv}^2\wedge J_{qv}^{2}\right] \nonumber \\ &\quad +d\varphi^{2}\wedge \left[J_{qp}^2 +\frac{\mathrm{p}_1}{\mathrm{K}^2}d^{-1}J_{qv}^1\wedge J_{qv}^{2} -\frac{\mathrm{p}_2}{\mathrm{K}^2}d^{-1}J_{qv}^1\wedge J_{qv}^{1}\right] \nonumber \\ &\quad +\delta_{IJ}d\zeta^{I}\wedge J_{qv}^{J},\end{aligned}$$ where we have used the equation of motion to write $a^I = (2\pi/\mathrm{K})(d^{-1} J^I_{qv})$. Demanding the gauge invariance, we can read off the conservation law of currents, $$\begin{aligned} & d\left[J_{qp}^I+\frac{\mathrm{p}_{\bar{I}}}{\mathrm{K}^2}d^{-1}J_{qv}^{\bar{I}} \wedge J_{qv}^{I} -\frac{\mathrm{p}_I}{\mathrm{K}^2}d^{-1}J_{qv}^{\bar{I}}\wedge J_{qv}^{\bar{I}}\right]=0, %\nonumber \\ %& %d\left[J_{qp}^2+\frac{\mathrm{p}_1}{\mathrm{K}^2}d^{-1}J_{qv}^1\wedge J_{qv}^{2} %-\frac{\mathrm{p}_2}{\mathrm{K}^2}d^{-1}J_{qv}^1\wedge J_{qv}^{1}\right]=0, \nonumber \\ & dJ_{qv}^{I}= 0. \label{current conservation}\end{aligned}$$ Here, for static configuration of currents $J^I_{qv}$, $d^{-1} J^I_{qv}\wedge J^J_{qv}$, once integrated over space, is the Hopf linking number, $$\begin{aligned} \mbox{Hopf}(J^I_{qv}, J^J_{qv}) = \int_{\Sigma} (d^{-1} J^I_{qv})\wedge J^J_{qv},\end{aligned}$$ in the spatial manifold $\Sigma$. Thus, the composite of the particle current and Hopf linking number current is conserved. This suggests that the Hopf linking number can be treated effectively as a quasiparticle of some sort (Fig. \[fig:fig0\]). This point of view also played a crucial role in our previous work, Ref. . Integrating over the equation of motion over the spatial manifold $\Sigma$, again by using $a^I = (2\pi/\mathrm{K}) (d^{-1}J^I_{qv})$, we obtain $$\begin{aligned} \frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi} \int_{\Sigma} db^I &= -\frac{ \mathrm{p}_I}{\mathrm{K}^2} \int_{\Sigma} (d^{-1}J^{\bar{I}}_{qv}) \wedge J^{\bar{I}}_{qv} \nonumber \\ &\quad +\frac{ \mathrm{p}_{\bar{I}}}{\mathrm{K}^2} \int_{\Sigma} (d^{-1}J^{\bar{I}}_{qv})\wedge J^I_{qv} %-\frac{ \mathrm{p}_2}{\mathrm{K}^2} \int_{\Sigma} J^2 \wedge (d^{-1}J^1) + \int_{\Sigma} J_{qp}^I, %\nonumber \\ %\frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi} \int_{\Sigma} db^2 %&= %-\frac{\mathrm{p}_2}{\mathrm{K}^2} \int_{\Sigma} (d^{-1}J^1_{qv})\wedge J^1_{qv} %\nonumber \\ %&\quad %+\frac{\mathrm{p}_1}{\mathrm{K}^2} \int_{\Sigma} (d^{-1}J^1_{qv})\wedge J^2_{qv} %%-\frac{\mathrm{p}_1}{\mathrm{K}^2} \int_{\Sigma} J^1\wedge (d^{-1}J^2) %+ \int_{\Sigma} J_{qp}^2, \label{eom integrated}\end{aligned}$$ where note that in the static configurations considered here, $J_{qv}$ is a delta function two form supporting a spatial loop, whereas $J_{qp}$ is a delta function three form supporting a spatial point. Correspondingly, $d^{-1}J_{qv}$ is a delta function one form supporting a three dimensional manifold. The contributions to the flux $\int_{\Sigma}db^I$ coming from quasivortex loops, $\int_{\Sigma} (d^{-1}J^I_{qv}) \wedge J^J_{qv}$, are given in terms of their Hopf linking number. By using the Stokes theorem, Eq. can be used to link the twisted partition functions on the boundary and the quantum numbers in the bulk, and hence to establish the bulk-boundary correspondence. ![ Hopf links (a) and Borromean rings (b) as an effective quasiparticle. The red dot represents an "ordinary" point-like quasiparticle. <span data-label="fig:fig0"></span>](monopole_condensation_crop.pdf "fig:")\ The quadratic theory {#The quadratic theory} -------------------- In Ref. , an alternative to the cubic theory , the quadratic theory, is proposed: $$\begin{aligned} S &= \frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi} \int \delta_{IJ} b^I \wedge da^I - \int \delta_{IJ} a^I \wedge J^I_{qp} \nonumber \\ &\quad -\int \left[ b^1 + \frac{\mathrm{p}_2}{2\pi\mathrm{K}} a^1 \wedge a^2 \right] \wedge J^1_{qv} \nonumber \\ &\quad -\int \left[ b^2 + \frac{\mathrm{p}_1}{2\pi\mathrm{K}} a^2 \wedge a^1 \right] \wedge J^2_{qv}. \label{quadratic 3loopaction}\end{aligned}$$ Comparing the cubic and quadratic theories, in the cubic theory, the canonical commutation relations differ from the ordinary $BF$ theory, while they remain the same in the quadratic theory. On the other hand, the set of Wilson loop and surface operators in the cubic theory is conventional (i.e., identical to the ordinary $BF$ theory) while it is modified in the quadratic theory, as seen from the coupling to $J^I_{qv}$ (see below in Eq. ). In spite of these differences, the algebra of Wilson loop and surface operators of the two theories appear to be identical. We will use the cubic and quadratic theories somewhat interchangeably; When discussing the Wilson operator algebra and ground state wave functions (functionals), we will use the quadratic theories, while when discussing the condensation picture, we will use the cubic theory. ### Gauge invariance One can derive the infinitesimal gauge transformations from the source-free part of the action . Since in this case the theory is identical to the ordinary $BF$ theory, there are two conserved charges $(\mathrm{K}/2\pi)db^{I}$ and $(\mathrm{K}/2\pi) da^I$. These are 3-form density-like and 2-form vorticity-like charge operators, respectively. The gauge transformations are generated by these charge operators and are given by $$\begin{aligned} a^{I}\to a^{I}+d\varphi^{I}, \quad b^{I}\to b^{I}+d\zeta^{I}. \label{quadratic gauge trsf}\end{aligned}$$ Similar to the cubic theory discussed earlier, demanding the invariance under , one can read off the conservation law of current, which is identical to . Three-loop braiding statistics {#Three-loop braiding statistics} ------------------------------ To see the three-loop braiding statistics, we need to quantize the coupled $BF$ theory (either the cubic theory or its quadratic avatar). In this section, we consider the coupled $BF$ theory on topologically trivial spacetimes, e.g., $\Sigma=\mathbb{R}^3$, $\mathcal{M}=\mathbb{R}^3\times \mathbb{R}$, and study the properties of the Wilson loop and Wilson surface operators. In the next section, we put the coupled $BF$ theory on the spatial manifold with non-trivial topology, the three torus, $\Sigma=T^3$. As one of the simplest and quickest way to see the three-loop braiding statistics, let us start by integrating over $a^I$ and $b^I$, on both cubic and quadratic theories. One then obtains the effective action of the currents $$\begin{aligned} \mathcal Z[J^I_{qp},J^J_{qv}]=e^{i S_{eff}[J_{qp}^I,J_{qv}^J]}=\int\mathcal{D}[a^I, b^I] e^{i S} \end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned} S_{eff} &= -\frac{2\pi}{\mathrm{K}} \int (d^{-1}J^I_{qv})\wedge J^I_{qp} \nonumber \\ \quad &+ \frac{2\pi\mathrm{p}_1}{\mathrm{K}^3} \int (d^{-1}J^1_{qv})\wedge (d^{-1}J^2_{qv})\wedge J^2_{qv} \nonumber \\ \quad &+ \frac{2\pi\mathrm{p}_{2}}{\mathrm{K}^3} \int (d^{-1}J^2_{qv})\wedge (d^{-1}J^1_{qv})\wedge J^1_{qv}.\end{aligned}$$ The first term in the effective action describes, as in the ordinary $BF$ theory, the quasparticle-quasivortex braiding statistics. It is given in terms of the linking number of $$\begin{aligned} \mathrm{Link}( J_{qv}^I, J_{qp}^J) = \int_{\mathcal{M}} (d^{-1}J^I_{qv})\wedge J^J_{qp},\end{aligned}$$ in the spacetime $\mathcal{M}$. On the other hand, the second and third terms include topological linking among three quasivortex loops, i.e., three-loop braiding statistics. The three-loop braiding statistics can also be discussed by quantizing the theory and using the Wilson loop and Wilson surface operators. Let us now take the quadratic theory . From the coupling to the currents, we read off the Wilson loop and Wilson surface operators in the theory: $$\begin{aligned} A^{I}_L:= \exp \left[i \int_L a^I\right], \quad W^{I}_S:= \exp \left[ i \int_S \Lambda^I \right], \label{surface op. quadratic theory}\end{aligned}$$ where $L$ and $S$ are arbitrary closed loop and surfaces in the spatial manifold $\Sigma$, respectively, and $$\begin{aligned} \Lambda^I:= b^I + \frac{\mathrm{q}_{\bar{I}}}{2\pi} a^I\wedge a^{\bar{I}}.\end{aligned}$$ The commutation relations between these Wilson operators can be computed from the canonical commutation relation $$\begin{aligned} [a^I_{i}(x),b^{Jj}(y)]=\frac{{2\pi i}}{\mathrm{K}} \delta^{IJ} \delta_{i}^{j}\delta^{(3)}(x-y)\end{aligned}$$ where $a^I= a^I_i dx^i$, $b^I= (1/2)b^I_{ij} dx^i \wedge dx^j$, and $ b^{I i}:=(1/2)\epsilon^{ijk}b^I_{jk} $. (We have adopted the temporal gauge $a^I_0 = b^I_{0i}=0$.) The exponents of the Wilson operators satisfy $$\begin{aligned} & \Big[ {\textstyle \int_C a^I}, {\textstyle \int_S \Lambda^J} \Big] = \frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}} \delta^{IJ} I(C,S), \nonumber \\ & \Big[ {\textstyle \int_S \Lambda^I}, {\textstyle \int_{S'} \Lambda^J} \Big] = \frac{2i}{\mathrm{K}^2} \textstyle{\int_{S\#S'} } \left( \mathrm{p}_{\bar{J}} \delta^{I\bar{J}} a^{J} - \mathrm{p}_{\bar{J}} \delta^{IJ} a^{\bar{J}} % \nonumber\\ &\quad \qquad \right)\end{aligned}$$ and as before the repeated capital Roman indices are not summed over. Here, $$\begin{aligned} I(C,S)= \int_{\Sigma} \delta(C)\wedge \delta(S)\end{aligned}$$ is the intersection number between $C$ and $S$, and $S\sharp S'$ is the intersection of $S$ and $S'$. The three-loop braiding statistic is encoded in the following product of Wilson operators @yoshida2015gapped $$\begin{aligned} & (\hat{W}^{J\dag}_{S'} \hat{W}^{I\dag}_S \hat{W}^J_{S'} \hat{W}^I_S) \hat{W}^{K\dag}_{S^{\prime\prime}} (\hat{W}^{I\dag}_{S} \hat{W}^{J\dag}_{S'} \hat{W}^{I}_{S} \hat{W}^{J}_{S'}) \hat{W}^{K}_{S^{\prime\prime}} \nonumber \\ &\quad = \exp\left( \big[ \big[ i {\textstyle \int_S \hat{\Lambda}^I}, i {\textstyle \int_{S'}\hat{\Lambda}^J}\big], i {\textstyle \int_{S^{\prime\prime}} \hat{\Lambda}^{K}} \big] \right)\end{aligned}$$ where the triple commutator is given by $$\begin{aligned} & \Big[ \Big[ {\textstyle \int_S \Lambda^I}, {\textstyle \int_{S'} \Lambda^J} \Big], {\textstyle \int_{S^{\prime\prime}}\Lambda^K} \Big] \nonumber \\ &\quad = \frac{4\pi \mathrm{p}_{\bar{J}} }{\mathrm{K}^3} \big( \delta^{IJ}\delta^{\bar{J}K} - \delta^{I\bar{J}}\delta^{JK} \big) I(S\#S', S^{\prime\prime}).\end{aligned}$$ Physically, this product of Wilson operators braids loop $I$ with loop $J$ while both $I$ and $J$ are linked with 'background' loop $K$. Notice that the triple commutator satisfies the Jacobi identiy: $$\begin{aligned} & \big[\big[ \textstyle{\int_{S}}\hat{\Lambda}^I, \textstyle{\int_{S'}}\hat{\Lambda}^J\big], \textstyle{\int_{S''}}\hat{\Lambda}^K \big] +\big[\big[ \textstyle{\int_{S'}}\hat{\Lambda}^J, \textstyle{\int_{S''}}\hat{\Lambda}^K\big], \textstyle{\int_{S}}\hat{\Lambda}^I \big] \nonumber \\ & \quad +\big[\big[ \textstyle{\int_{S''}}\hat{\Lambda}^K, \textstyle{\int_{S}}\hat{\Lambda}^I\big], \textstyle{\int_{S'}}\hat{\Lambda}^J \big]=0.\end{aligned}$$ This is equivalent to the cyclic relation for the three-loop braiding phase first derived by Wang and Levin in Ref. . Quantization on a closed spatial manifold {#Quantization on a closed spatial manifold} ----------------------------------------- In Sec. \[Three-loop braiding statistics\], the coupled $BF$ theory on topologically trivial spacetime is studied in the presence of background quasiparticle and quasivortec currents. In this section, we consider spacetime wherein its spatial part $\Sigma$ is topologically non-trivial. (Our setting closely parallels with Ref. .) In particular, we will focus on $\Sigma$ which is formal. (See the definition of manifolds being formal below.) The simplest case is $\Sigma=T^3$. ### Mode decomposition and the zero-mode algebra We Hodge decompose the gauge fields as $a^I$ and $b^I$ as $$\begin{aligned} a^I & =d\theta^I+\star dK^{I\prime}+\alpha^I_{l}\omega_{l}, \nonumber \\ b^I & =dK^I+\star d\theta^{I\prime}+\beta^I_{l}\eta_{l},\end{aligned}$$ where $d\theta^I, dK^I$ and $\star dK^{\prime I}, \star d\theta^{I\prime}$ are the exact and coexact parts of the decomposition, respectively, and $\{\omega_l\}_l$ and $\{\eta_l\}_l$ are bases of harmonic one- and two-forms, respectively. $(d\omega_l = d\star \omega_l =0)$. The "zero modes", $\alpha^I_l$ and $\beta^I_l$, which appear in the Hodge decomposition, play a crucial role later. Let $\{ L^m\}$ and $\{S^m\}$ be a set of generators of the first and second homology groups, $H_1(\Sigma; \mathbb{Z})$ and $H_2(\Sigma; \mathbb{Z})$, respectively. We define the linking matrix by $$\begin{aligned} M^{mn}= I(S^m, L^n) %= \sum_{I_{mn}} \mathrm{sgn}\, (I_{mn}),\end{aligned}$$ which counts the signed intersections $I_{mn}$ of $S^m$ and $L^n$. Furthermore, $$\begin{aligned} \int_{L^{m}}\omega_{l}=\delta_{l}^{m}, \quad \int_{S^{m}}\eta_{l}=\delta_{l}^{m}, \quad \int_{\Sigma} \omega_{l}\wedge\eta_{k}=M_{lk}\end{aligned}$$ where $M_{lm}$ is the inverse of the linking matrix of $\Sigma$. For the reason which will become clear momentarily, we will work on a spatial manifold which is <span>*formal*</span>. Here, a Riemannian metric is called (metrically) formal if all wedge products of harmonic forms are harmonic. A closed manifold is called geometrically formal if it admits a formal Riemannian metric. @kotschick2001products In particular, we will focus on the one of the simplest formal manifolds; three-torus, $\Sigma=T^3$. The Wilson loop/surface operators for $L^m$ and $S^m$ on $\Sigma$ are written in terms of the zero modes, $\alpha^I_l$ and $\beta^I_l$. By noting $ \int_{L^i} a^I = M^{mi} \int_{\Sigma} a\wedge \eta_m = \alpha^I_i $, the Wilson operators for the gauge field $a^I_l$ are given by $$\begin{aligned} A^I_i := \exp i \int_{L^i} a^I = \exp i \alpha^I_i.\end{aligned}$$ Similarly, one notes $ \int_{S^l} b^I = M^{lm} \int_{\Sigma} b\wedge \omega_m = \beta^I_l $. Since $\Sigma$ is formal, $$\begin{aligned} \int_{S^l} a^I \wedge a^J &= \alpha^I_i \alpha^J_j \int_{S^l} \omega_i \wedge \omega_j % \nonumber \\ % &= % \alpha^I_i \alpha^J_j % \int_{S^l} % C_{ijk} \eta_k % \nonumber \\ % &= C_{ijl}\end{aligned}$$ where the product of the two harmonic one-form $\omega_i \wedge \omega_j $ is given in terms of the harmonic two-form as $\omega_i \wedge \omega_j = C_{ijk}\eta_k$. Thus, we consider the Wilson surface operators $$\begin{aligned} W^I_i &:= \exp i \int_{S^i} \left( b^I + \frac{\mathrm{q}_{\bar{I}}}{2\pi} a^I\wedge a^{\bar{I}} \right) \nonumber \\ &= \exp i \left( \beta^I_i + \frac{\mathrm{q}_{\bar{I}}}{2\pi} C_{lmi} \alpha^I_l \alpha^{\bar{I}}_m \right).\end{aligned}$$ In the following, we canonically quantize the theory, and study the algebra obeyed by the Wilson operators. We will focus on $\Sigma=T^3$, for which the linking matrix is simply the $3\times 3$ identity matrix, $$\begin{aligned} M^{mn}=\delta_{mn}.\end{aligned}$$ We also take $$\begin{aligned} C_{ijk} = \epsilon_{ijk}\end{aligned}$$ Upon canonical quantization, the zero modes, $\hat{\alpha}^I_i$ and $\hat{\beta}^I_i$, now denoted with hat to indicate they are quantum operators, satisfy the commutator $$\begin{aligned} \big[ \hat{\alpha}^I_i, \hat{\beta}^J_j \big] = \frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K} } \delta_{ij} \delta^{IJ}.\end{aligned}$$ Correspondingly, we consider the set of Wilson operators $$\begin{aligned} &\quad \hat{A}^I_i = \exp\big( i \hat{\alpha}^I_i \big), \quad \hat{W}^I_i = \exp \big(i \hat{\Lambda}^I_i \big), \nonumber \\ & \mbox{where} \quad \hat{\Lambda}^I_i = \hat{\beta}^I_i + \frac{\mathrm{q}_{\bar{I}}}{2\pi} \epsilon_{ijk} \hat{\alpha}^I_j \hat{\alpha}^{\bar{I}}_k, % \nonumber \\ % \hat{\Lambda}^2_i &= % \hat{\beta}^2_i + \frac{\mathrm{q}_1}{2\pi} \epsilon_{ijk} \hat{\alpha}^2_j \hat{\alpha}^1_k\end{aligned}$$ The commutators among $\hat{\alpha}^I_i$ and $\hat{\Lambda}^I_i$ are: $$\begin{aligned} \big[ \hat{\alpha}^I_i, \hat{\alpha}^J_j \big] &= 0, \quad \big[ \hat{\alpha}^I_i, \hat{\Lambda}^J_j \big] = \frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K} } \delta_{ij} \delta^{IJ} \nonumber \\ \big[ \hat{\Lambda}^I_i, \hat{\Lambda}^I_j \big] &= \frac{2 i \mathrm{q}_{\bar{I}}}{\mathrm{K}}\epsilon_{ijk} \hat{\alpha}^{\bar{I}}_k, \nonumber \\ \big[ \hat{\Lambda}^1_i , \hat{\Lambda}^2_j \big] &= \frac{-i \mathrm{q}_2}{\mathrm{K}}\epsilon_{ijk} \hat{\alpha}^1_k - \frac{i \mathrm{q}_1}{\mathrm{K}}\epsilon_{ijk} \hat{\alpha}^2_k. % \nonumber \\ %\big[ % \hat{\Lambda}^2_i , % \hat{\Lambda}^2_j % \big] % &= % \frac{2 i \mathrm{q}_1}{\mathrm{K}}\epsilon_{ijk} \hat{\alpha}^1_k. \label{commutators}\end{aligned}$$ ### The Wilson operator algebra and three-loop braiding statistics The three-loop braiding phase can be read off from the algebra of Wilson surface operators. To compute the algebra of Wilson operators, we use the Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula: $$\begin{aligned} e^{\hat{A}} e^{\hat{B}} &= \exp\Big( \hat{A}+\hat{B}+\frac{1}{2}[\hat{A},\hat{B}] \nonumber \\ &\qquad + \frac{1}{12}\left[ \hat{A}-\hat{B}, \left[\hat{A},\hat{B}\right] \right]+\cdots \Big).\end{aligned}$$ Thus, for the products of Wilson operator, $$\begin{aligned} & \hat{W}^{I\dag}_i \hat{W}^{J\dag}_j \hat{W}^I_i \hat{W}^J_j \nonumber \\ &\quad = \exp\left( [i\hat{\Lambda}^I_i, i\hat{\Lambda}^J_j ]\right), \nonumber \\ & (\hat{W}^{J\dag}_j \hat{W}^{I\dag}_i \hat{W}^J_j \hat{W}^I_i) \hat{W}^{K\dag}_k (\hat{W}^{I\dag}_i \hat{W}^{J\dag}_j \hat{W}^{I}_i \hat{W}^{J}_j) \hat{W}^{K}_k \nonumber \\ &\quad = \exp\left( [ [ i \hat{\Lambda}^I_i, i\hat{\Lambda}^J_j ], i\hat{\Lambda}^{K}_k ] \right). \label{products of Wilson operators}\end{aligned}$$ The triple commutator is a phase and the above algebra of Wilson surface operator describes the three-loop braiding phase. This is consistent with previous work on three-loop braiding statistics. @yoshida2015gapped To have a non-zero three-loop braiding phase, $I,J,K$ cannot be all equal. $i,j,k$ cannot be all equal neither. We list non-zero triple-linking phase factors below: $$\begin{aligned} \big[\big[\hat{\Lambda}^I_i,\hat{\Lambda}^I_j \big], \hat{\Lambda}^{\bar{I}}_k \big] &= -\epsilon_{ijk} \frac{4\pi \mathrm{q}_{\bar{I}}}{\mathrm{K}^2}, \nonumber \\ \big[\big[\hat{\Lambda}^1_i,\hat{\Lambda}^2_j \big], \hat{\Lambda}^1_k \big] &= \big[\big[\hat{\Lambda}^2_i,\hat{\Lambda}^1_j \big], \hat{\Lambda}^1_k \big] = \epsilon_{ijk} \frac{2\pi \mathrm{q}_2}{\mathrm{K}^2}, \nonumber \\ \big[\big[\hat{\Lambda}^1_i,\hat{\Lambda}^2_j \big], \hat{\Lambda}^2_k \big] &= \big[\big[\hat{\Lambda}^2_i,\hat{\Lambda}^1_j \big], \hat{\Lambda}^2_k \big] = \epsilon_{ijk} \frac{2\pi \mathrm{q}_1}{\mathrm{K}^2}. % \nonumber \\ % \big[\big[\hat{\Lambda}^2_i,\hat{\Lambda}^2_j \big], \hat{\Lambda}^1_k \big] %&= % -\epsilon_{ijk} \frac{4\pi \mathrm{q}_1}{\mathrm{K}^2}.\end{aligned}$$ ### Large gauge invariance {#Large gauge invariance two flavors} Unlike the infinitesimal gauge transformations, the large gauge transformations cannot be derived from the conserved charges or Gauss law constraints of the action. However, the large gauge invariance can be deduced by demanding the invariance of the Wilson operators $\hat{A}^I_i$ and $\hat{W}^I_i$. (Or vice versa: once the large gauge transformations are properly defined, the Wilson operators are defined as those that are invariant under the large gauge transformations.) Hence the correct large gauge transformations are $$\begin{aligned} \hat{\alpha}^I_i &\to \hat{\alpha}'^{I}_i=\hat{\alpha}^I_i + 2\pi n^I_i, \nonumber \\ \hat{\beta}^I_i &\to \hat{\beta}'^{I}_i= \hat{\beta}^I_i - \mathrm{q}_{\bar{I}} \epsilon_{ijk} \left[ n^I_j \hat{\alpha}^{\bar{I}}_k + \hat{\alpha}^I_j n^{\bar{I}}_k + 2\pi n^I_j n^{\bar{I}}_k \right]. %\nonumber \\ %\hat{\beta}^2_i %&\to \hat{\beta}'^2_i=\hat{\beta}^2_i - %\mathrm{q}_1 \epsilon_{ijk} \left[ %n^2_j \hat{\alpha}^1_k %+ %\hat{\alpha}^2_j n^1_k %+ %2\pi n^2_j n^1_k %\right]. \label{large_gauge}\end{aligned}$$ It is worth noticing that, since $\hat{\beta}_i^I$ transforms non-linearly under large gauge transformations, the $\big[\hat{\beta}^{I}_i,\hat{\beta}^{J}_j\big]$ commutator is not preserved. In fact, $$\begin{aligned} \big[ \hat{\beta}^{\prime I}_i, \hat{\beta}^{\prime I}_j \big] %&= %\left[ % \hat{\beta}^{1}_i, %\mathrm{q}_2 \epsilon_{jpq} \hat{\alpha}^1_p n^2_q % \right] %+ %\left[ %\mathrm{q}_2 \epsilon_{irs} \hat{\alpha}^1_r n^2_s , % \hat{\beta}^{1}_j % \right] % \nonumber \\ %& = %\mathrm{q}_2 \epsilon_{jpq} n^2_q %\left[ % \hat{\beta}^{1}_i, %\hat{\alpha}^1_p % \right] % + %\mathrm{q}_2 \epsilon_{irs} n^2_s %\left[ %\hat{\alpha}^1_r, % \hat{\beta}^{1}_j % \right] % \nonumber \\ % &= %\mathrm{q}_2 \epsilon_{jpq} n^2_q %\frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}} \delta_{ip} % + %\mathrm{q}_2 \epsilon_{irs} n^2_s %\frac{-2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}} \delta_{rj} %\nonumber \\ %&= %\mathrm{q}_2 \epsilon_{jiq} n^2_q %\frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}} % + %\mathrm{q}_2 \epsilon_{ijs} n^2_s %\frac{-2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}} %\nonumber \\ %&= %\frac{2\pi i \mathrm{q}_2}{\mathrm{K}} %\left( %\epsilon_{jiq} n^2_q % - %\epsilon_{ijs} n^2_s %\right) & = -\frac{4\pi i \mathrm{q}_{\bar{I}}}{\mathrm{K}}\epsilon_{ijk}n_{k}^{\bar{I}}, \nonumber \\ %\frac{ i 2\mathrm{q}_2}{\mathrm{K}} %\epsilon_{ijk} %(2\pi n^2_k) \big[\hat{\beta}'^{1}_i,\hat{\beta}'^{2}_j\big]&= \frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}}\epsilon^{ijk}\left(\mathrm{q}_1n_k^2+\mathrm{q}_2n_k^1\right), %\nonumber \\ %\big[\hat{\beta}'^{2}_i,\hat{\beta}'^{2}_j\big]&= -\frac{4\pi i \mathrm{q}_1}{\mathrm{K}}\epsilon_{ijk}n_{k}^1.\end{aligned}$$ However the algebra of observables, i.e the Wilson algebra transforms covariantly under large gauge transformations. E.g., $$\begin{aligned} \big[ \hat{\Lambda}^{\prime 1}_i, \hat{\Lambda}^{\prime 1}_j \big] %& = % \frac{-2 i \mathrm{q}_2}{\mathrm{K}}\epsilon_{ijk} \hat{\alpha}^2_k %- %\frac{ i 2\mathrm{q}_2}{\mathrm{K}} %\epsilon_{ijk} %(2\pi n^2_k) %\nonumber \\ &= \frac{-2 i \mathrm{q}_2}{\mathrm{K}}\epsilon_{ijk} (\hat{\alpha}^2_k + 2\pi n^2_k) = \frac{-2 i \mathrm{q}_2}{\mathrm{K}}\epsilon_{ijk} \hat{\alpha}^{\prime 2}_k. %\nonumber \\ %%\left[ % \hat{\Lambda}^{\prime 2}_i, % \hat{\Lambda}^{\prime 2}_j % \right] %&= \frac{-2 i \mathrm{q}_1}{\mathrm{K}}\epsilon_{ijk} \hat{\alpha}^{\prime 1}_k \nonumber \\ %\left[ % \hat{\Lambda}^{\prime 2}_i, % \hat{\Lambda}^{\prime 2}_j % \right] %&=\frac{i\epsilon_{ijk}}{K}\left(q_1\hat{\alpha}_k^{\prime 2}+ q_2\hat{\alpha}_k^{\prime 1}\right)\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, the operator algebra is preserved under the large gauge transformations. As for the Wilson operators $\hat{A}^I_i$ and $\hat{W}^I_i$, they are invariant under the large gauge transformations by construction. Nevertheless, it should be noted that their product may not be so, as seen in $\hat{W}^{I\dag}_i\hat{W}^{J\dag}_j\hat{W}^I_i\hat{W}^J_j$ in Eq. (note the commutators in Eq. ), although the algebra of the Wilson operators is gauge covariant; The algebra of the Wilson operators generated by $\hat{A}^I_i$ and $\hat{W}^I_i$ and that generated by $\hat{A}^{I\prime}_i$ and $\hat{W}^{I\prime}_i$ are isomorphic. While $\hat{W}^{I\dag}_i\hat{W}^{J\dag}_j\hat{W}^I_i\hat{W}^J_j$ is not gauge invariant, the product $ (\hat{W}^{J\dag}_j \hat{W}^{I\dag}_i \hat{W}^J_j \hat{W}^I_i) \hat{W}^{K\dag}_k (\hat{W}^{I\dag}_i \hat{W}^{J\dag}_j \hat{W}^{I}_i \hat{W}^{J}_j) \hat{W}^{K}_k $ and the triple commutator $ [ [ i \hat{\Lambda}^I_i, i\hat{\Lambda}^J_j ], i\hat{\Lambda}^{K}_k ] $ are large gauge invariant, and so is the three-loop braiding phase. Wave function in terms of Wilson operators {#Wave function in terms of Wilson operators} ------------------------------------------ In the previous section, we have computed the algebra of the Wilson operators of the coupled $BF$ theory for non-contractible loops and surfaces on $T^3$. As we will show momentarily, in this section, we can build and label all the ground states on $T^3$ in terms of these Wilson operators. Furthermore, we will use these ground states to calculate the modular $\mathcal{T}$ and $\mathcal{S}$ matrices, which encode the spin and the braiding statistics of topological excitations. @WangLevin2015 [@WangWen2015; @JiangMesarosRan2014; @WangLevin2014; @wang2016quantum; @wan2015twisted] For this purpose, it is advantageous to construct the three-dimensional version of minimum entropy states (MESs), which are a special choice of the basis for the ground state multiplet.@Zhang2012 By calculating the overlap between MESs before and after applying the modular $\mathcal{S}$ and $\mathcal{T}$ transformations, we can read off the braiding statistics for particle-loop and three-loop braiding. The MES basis has been constructed before in Refs. for microscopic models defined on lattices. We will show that the $\mathcal{S}$ and $\mathcal{T}$ matrices that we are going to calculate are the same as that for their model, and therefore we verify that our model is the continuum version of the Dijkgraaf-Witten model. @dijkgraaf1990topological These $\mathcal{S}$ and $\mathcal{T}$ matrices are also consistent with those calculated from the partition functions of the gapless boundary theory in our previous paper. @chen2015bulk ### The ordinary $BF$ theory Before we study the $\mathcal{S}$ and $\mathcal{T}$ matrices for the coupled $BF$ theory, as a warm up, we first demonstrate our strategy for the ordinary $BF$ theory on $T^3$. The zero modes of the $BF$ theory obey the commutation relation $ [\hat{\alpha}_i,\hat{\beta}_j]=\delta_{ij}({2\pi i}/{\mathrm{K}}) $, $[\hat{\alpha}_i,\hat{\alpha}_j]=[\hat{\beta}_i,\hat{\beta}_j]=0$, where $i,j=1,2,3$. The Wilson loop and surface operators for non-contractible loops and surfaces on $T^3$ are given by $\hat{A}_i=\exp(i\hat{\alpha}_i)$ and $\hat{B}_i=\exp(i\hat{\beta}_i)$, and by taking powers thereof. They satisfy $$\begin{aligned} \hat{A}_i\hat{B}_j=\delta_{ij}e^{-2\pi i/\mathrm{K}}\hat{B}_j\hat{A}_i.\end{aligned}$$ We define and choose a vacuum state (a reference state) $|0\rangle$ such that all $\hat{A}_i$'s are diagonal. All the other ground states can be generated, starting from $|0\rangle$, by applying $\hat{B}_i$: $\hat{B}_3^a\hat{B}_2^b\hat{B}_1^c|0\rangle$. These states are the eigenstate of $\hat{A}_i$ operator. The $\mathcal{S}$ and $\mathcal{T}$ matrices for this basis is the Kronecker delta and do not tell us the information about the spin and braiding taylorballard@example.com. To extract the spin and braiding statistics, we construct the three-dimensional version of MESs in $z$-direction by considering the eigenstates of the Wilson operators $\hat{A}_1$, $\hat{A}_2$ and $\hat{B}_3$. Namely, we consider the set of states given by $$\begin{aligned} |\Psi_{n_1,n_2,n_3}\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\mathrm{K}}}\sum_{\lambda}e^{\frac{2\pi i\lambda n_3}{\mathrm{K}}} \hat{B}_3^{\lambda}\hat{B}_1^{n_1}\hat{B}_2^{n_2}|0\rangle\end{aligned}$$ where $\lambda,n_1,n_2,n_3\in \mathbb{Z}_{\mathrm{K}}$. As we check momentarily, the $\mathcal{T}$ matrix acts diagonally on these states – an expected feature for states with definite "topological" or "anyonic" charge. The $\mathcal{T}$ transformation can be visualized as the shear deformation in the $xz$ plane (as its two-dimensional counter part on $T^2$). Hence, under the $\mathcal{T}$ transformation, $\hat{B}_1\to\hat{B}_1\hat{B}_3$. The MESs $|\Psi_{n_i}\rangle$ are transformed under $\mathcal{T}$ as $$\begin{aligned} \mathcal{T}|\Psi_{n_i}\rangle&=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\mathrm{K}}}\sum_{\lambda}e^{\frac{2\pi i\lambda n_3}{\mathrm{K}}}\hat{B}_3^{\lambda+n_1}\hat{B}_1^{n_1}\hat{B}_2^{n_2}|0\rangle\nonumber\\ &=e^{-\frac{2\pi i n_1n_3}{\mathrm{K}}}|\Psi_{n_i}\rangle.\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, $\mathcal{T}$ matrix takes a diagonal form for the MESs, and encodes information related to a (3+1)d analogue of topological spin. The modular $\mathcal{S}$ transformation is slightly more non-trivial and can be decomposed into $\mathcal{S}_{13}$ and $\mathcal{S}_{12}$, which are $90^{\circ}$ rotation in the $xz$ and $xy$ planes, respectively. Under the $\mathcal{S}_{13}$ transformation, $$\begin{aligned} \mathcal{S}_{13}|\Psi_{n_i}\rangle =\frac{1}{\sqrt{\mathrm{K}}}\sum_{\lambda} e^{\frac{2\pi i\lambda n_3}{\mathrm{K}}}\hat{B}_1^{-\lambda}\hat{B}_3^{n_1}\hat{B}_2^{n_2}|0\rangle.\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, the $\mathcal{S}_{13}$ matrix for the MES basis is calculated as $$\begin{aligned} \langle\Psi_{n_i^{\prime}}|\mathcal{S}_{13}|\Psi_{n_i}\rangle &=\frac{1}{\mathrm{K}}\sum_{\lambda^{\prime},\lambda}\langle 0|e^{\frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}}(-\lambda^{\prime}n_3^{\prime}+\lambda n_3)} \nonumber \\ &\quad \times \hat{B}_2^{-n_2^{\prime}}\hat{B}_3^{-n_1^{\prime}} \hat{B}_1^{\lambda^{\prime}}\hat{B}_3^{\lambda}\hat{B}_1^{n_1}\hat{B}_2^{n_2} |0\rangle\nonumber\\ &=\frac{1}{\mathrm{K}}\delta_{n^{\ }_2,n_2^{\prime}}e^{\frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}}(n^{\ }_1n_3^{\prime}+n_1^{\prime}n_3)}.\end{aligned}$$ In the above derivation, we use $-\lambda^{\prime}=n_1$, $\lambda=n_1^{\prime}$ and $n_2=n_2^{\prime}$. Combined with the $\mathcal{S}_{12}$ transformation, we can write down the modular $\mathcal{S}$ matrix $$\begin{aligned} \mathcal{S} =\frac{1}{\mathrm{K}}\delta_{n_1,n_2^{\prime}}e^{-\frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}}(n_3^{\prime}n_2-n_3n_1^{\prime})}.\end{aligned}$$ We can easily generalize the above results to the two decouple copies of $BF$ theories on $T^3$. The commutators among zero modes are $$\begin{aligned} [\hat{\alpha}_i^I,\hat{\beta}_j^J]=\delta_{ij}\delta_{IJ}\frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}}, \quad [\hat{\alpha}_i^I,\hat{\alpha}_j^J]=[\hat{\beta}_i^I,\hat{\beta}_j^J]=0. \label{two_bf_comm}\end{aligned}$$ The MES basis is given by $$\begin{aligned} |\Psi_{n_i}^{l_i}\rangle&=\frac{1}{\mathrm{K}}\sum_{\lambda_1,\lambda_2} e^{\frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}}(\lambda_1 n_3+\lambda_2 l_3)} (\hat{B}_3^1)^{\lambda_1}(\hat{B}_1^1)^{n_1}(\hat{B}_2^1)^{n_2} \nonumber\\ &\quad \times (\hat{B}_3^2)^{\lambda_2}(\hat{B}_1^2)^{l_1}(\hat{B}_2^2)^{l_2} |0\rangle.\end{aligned}$$ These states are an eigenstate of $\hat{A}_1^I$, $\hat{A}_2^I$, $\hat{B}_3^I$ ($I=1,2$). The modular $\mathcal{T}$ and $\mathcal{S}$ matrices are given by $$\begin{aligned} \mathcal{T}&= \delta_{n^{\ }_i,n_i^{\prime}}\delta_{l_i,l_i^{\prime}}e^{-\frac{2\pi i }{\mathrm{K}}(n_1n_3+l_1l_3)} \nonumber \\ \mathcal{S} &=\frac{1}{\mathrm{K}^2}\delta_{n^{\ }_1,n_2^{\prime}} \delta_{l^{\ }_1,l_2^{\prime}} e^{-\frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}}(n_3^{\prime}n_2-n_3n_1^{\prime})-\frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}}(l_3^{\prime}l_2-l_3l_1^{\prime})}\end{aligned}$$ ### The coupled $BF$ theory: wave functions in terms of $\hat{\alpha}$ and $\hat{\beta}$ For the coupled $BF$ theory realizing three-loop braiding statistics defined in Eq. , the commutators between $\alpha_i^I$ and $\beta_i^I$ are identical to those in the two decoupled copies of $BF$ theories defined in Eq. . On the other hand, if we consider $\Lambda_i^I$ instead of $\beta_i^I$, the commutators are $$\begin{aligned} [\hat{\alpha}_i^I,\hat{\Lambda}_j^J]=\delta_{ij}\delta_{IJ}\frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}},\quad [\hat{\alpha}_i^I,\hat{\alpha}_j^J]=0,\quad [\hat{\Lambda}_i^I,\hat{\Lambda}_j^J]\neq 0\end{aligned}$$ In the next two subsections, we will construct two sets of MESs in terms of $\beta_i^I$ and $\Lambda_i^I$. Let us first construct MESs using $\hat{\beta}^i_I$. Similar to the two decoupled copies of $BF$ theories, $\hat{A}_1^I$, $\hat{A}_2^I$, $\hat{B}_3^I$ ($I=1,2$) commute with each other. Therefore, we define the eigenstate for these operators as $$\begin{aligned} &|\Psi_{n_i}^{l_i}\rangle\sim \sum_{\lambda_1,\lambda_2} e^{\frac{2\pi i\lambda_1}{\mathrm{K}} \left(n_3+\frac{l\times n}{\mathrm{K}}\right) +\frac{2\pi i\lambda_2}{\mathrm{K}}\left(l_3+\frac{n\times l}{K}\right)} \nonumber\\ &\times (\hat{B}_1^1)^{n_1}(\hat{B}_2^1)^{n_2} (\hat{B}_1^2)^{l_1}(\hat{B}_2^2)^{l_2} (\hat{B}_3^1)^{\lambda_1} (\hat{B}_3^2)^{\lambda_2} |0\rangle, \label{gauge inv. states}\end{aligned}$$ where $l\times n :=l_1n_2-l_2n_1$. One verifies that the states constructed in Eq. are invariant under the large gauge transformations , up to a phase factor (which can depend on $n_i$ and $l_i$). Here for simplicity, we consider $\mathrm{q}_1=\mathrm{q}_2=1$. Different from the two decoupled copies of $BF$ theories, we require $\lambda_1,\lambda_2, n_i,l_i\in \mathbb{Z}_{\mathrm{K}^2}$ and $n_3$ ($l_3$) is shifted by $(l\times n)/\mathrm {K}$ ($(n\times l)/\mathrm{K}$). Because of the extra factor of $\mathrm{K}^{-1}$ in $l\times n/\mathrm{K}$ or $n\times l/\mathrm{K}$, it may seem that there are $\mathrm{K}^{12}$ different eigenstates, as opposed to $\mathrm{K}^6$, which is the expected number of ground states for two copies of $BF$ theories. This is however not the case once we properly reorganize these wave functions. Let us introduce $$\begin{aligned} &n_1\equiv \mathrm{K} t_1+\bar{n}_1,\quad n_2\equiv \mathrm{K}t_2+\bar{n}_2\nonumber\\ &\bar{n}_3\equiv n_3+s\times\bar{n}+\bar{l}\times t+\bar{l}_2(s_1-t_1)\ \mbox{mod}\ \mathrm{K} \nonumber\\ &l_1\equiv \mathrm{K}s_1+\bar{l}_1,\quad l_2\equiv \mathrm{K}s_2+\bar{l}_2\nonumber\\ &\bar{l}_3\equiv l_3+t\times\bar{l}+\bar{n}\times s+\bar{n}_2(t_1-s_1)\ \mbox{mod}\ \mathrm{K}\end{aligned}$$ where $\bar{n}_i,\bar{l}_i, t_1,t_2,s_1,s_2\in \mathbb{Z}_{\mathrm{K}}$. In terms of these quantum numbers, the wave functions depend only on (and are labeled by) $\bar{n}_i$ and $\bar{l}_i$, as they can be written as $$\begin{aligned} &|\Psi_{\bar{n}_i}^{\bar{l}_i}\rangle= \frac{1}{\mathrm{K}^3} \sum_{\lambda_{1,2},t_{1,2}, s_{1,2}} e^{\frac{2\pi i\lambda_1}{\mathrm{K}} \left(\bar{n}_3+\frac{\bar{l}\times \bar{n}}{\mathrm{K}}\right) +\frac{2\pi i\lambda_2}{\mathrm{K}}\left(\bar{l}_3+\frac{\bar{n}\times \bar{l}}{\mathrm{K}}\right)} \nonumber\\ &\quad \times (\hat{B}_1^1)^{\mathrm{K}t_1+\bar{n}_1}(\hat{B}_2^1)^{\mathrm{K}t_2+\bar{n}_2}\nonumber\\ &\quad \times (\hat{B}_1^2)^{\mathrm{K}s_1+\bar{l}_1}(\hat{B}_2^2)^{\mathrm{K}s_2+\bar{l}_2} (\hat{B}_3^1)^{\lambda_1} (\hat{B}_3^2)^{\lambda_2} |0\rangle. \label{wave1}\end{aligned}$$ This construction of the ground states is analogous to the construction of the surface partition functions realizing the three-loop braiding phase in Ref. . With respect to the ground states , the $\mathcal{T}$ transformation is diagonal, $$\begin{aligned} \mathcal{T}|\Psi_{\bar{n}_i}^{\bar{l}_i}\rangle = e^{-\frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}}\bar{n}_1\left( \bar{n}_3+\frac{\bar{l} \times \bar{n}}{\mathrm{K}} \right) -\frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}}\bar{n}_1\left( \bar{n}_3+\frac{\bar{l} \times \bar{n}}{\mathrm{K}} \right) } |\Psi_{\bar{n}_i}^{\bar{l}_i}\rangle \label{three_loop_t}\end{aligned}$$ On the other hand, the $\mathcal{S}_{13}$ matrix is $$\begin{aligned} & \langle \Psi_{\bar{n}_i^{\prime}}^{\bar{l}_i^{\prime}} | \mathcal{S}_{13} |\Psi_{\bar{n}_i}^{\bar{l}_i}\rangle =\frac{1}{\mathrm{K}^6} \sum_{ \lambda^{\ }_{1,2}, \lambda_{1,2}^{\prime}, t^{\ }_{1,2}, t_{1,2}^{\prime}, s^{\ }_{1,2},s_{1,2}^{\prime}} \nonumber\\ &\quad \times \langle 0| e^{ -\frac{2\pi i\lambda_1^{\prime}}{\mathrm{K}}\left(\bar{n}_3^{\prime}+\frac{\bar{l}^{\prime}\times \bar{n}^{\prime}}{\mathrm{K}}\right) -\frac{2\pi i\lambda_2^{\prime}}{\mathrm{K}}\left(\bar{l}_3^{\prime}+\frac{\bar{n}^{\prime}\times \bar{l}^{\prime}}{\mathrm{K}}\right) } \nonumber \\ &\quad \times e^{ +\frac{2\pi i\lambda_1}{\mathrm{K}} \left(\bar{n}_3+\frac{\bar{l}\times \bar{n}}{\mathrm{K}}\right) +\frac{2\pi i\lambda_2}{\mathrm{K}}\left(\bar{l}_3+\frac{\bar{n}\times \bar{l}}{\mathrm{K}}\right) } \nonumber\\ &\quad \times (\hat{B}_2^2)^{-(\mathrm{K}s_2^{\prime}+\bar{l}_2^{\prime})} (\hat{B}_3^2)^{-(\mathrm{K}s_1^{\prime}+\bar{l}_1^{\prime})}(\hat{B}_1^2)^{\lambda_2^{\prime}} \nonumber\\ &\quad \times (\hat{B}_2^1)^{-(\mathrm{K}t_2^{\prime}+\bar{n}_2^{\prime})} (\hat{B}_3^1)^{-(\mathrm{K}t_1^{\prime}+\bar{n}_1^{\prime})}(\hat{B}_1^1)^{\lambda_1^{\prime}} \nonumber\\ &\quad \times (\hat{B}_3^1)^{\lambda_1}(\hat{B}_1^1)^{\mathrm{K}t_1+\bar{n}_1}(\hat{B}_2^1)^{\mathrm{K}t_2+\bar{n}_2} \nonumber\\ &\quad \times (\hat{B}_3^2)^{\lambda_2}(\hat{B}_1^2)^{\mathrm{K}s_1+\bar{l}_1}(\hat{B}_2^2)^{\mathrm{K}s_2+\bar{l}_2} |0\rangle \nonumber\\ & =\frac{1}{\mathrm{K}^2}\delta_{\bar{n}_2,\bar{n}_2^{\prime}}\delta_{\bar{l}_2,\bar{l}_2^{\prime}}e^{i\theta^{\bar{n}_i^{\prime},\bar{l}_i^{\prime}, \bar{n}_i,\bar{l}_i}}\end{aligned}$$ where $\theta^{\bar{n}_i^{\prime},\bar{l}_i^{\prime}, \bar{n}_i,\bar{l}_i}$ is given by $$\begin{aligned} &\theta^{\bar{n}_i^{\prime},\bar{l}_i^{\prime},\bar{n}_i,\bar{l}_i}= \frac{2\pi}{\mathrm{K}}(\bar{n}_3\bar{n}_1^{\prime}+\bar{n}_3^{\prime}\bar{n}_1+\bar{l}_3\bar{l}_1^{\prime}+\bar{l}_3^{\prime}\bar{l}_1) \nonumber\\ &\quad +\frac{2\pi}{\mathrm{K}^2}\left[ (\bar{l}\times\bar{n})(n_1^{\prime}-l_1^{\prime})+(\bar{l}^{\prime}\times\bar{n}^{\prime})(n_1-l_1) \right]. \label{three_loop_phase}\end{aligned}$$ From the calculation of $\mathcal{S}_{13}$, we can further calculate the modular $\mathcal{S}$ matrix, $$\begin{aligned} \mathcal{S} &=\frac{1}{\mathrm{K}^2} \delta_{n_1,n_2^{\prime}}\delta_{l_1,l_2^{\prime}} e^{-\frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}}(n_3^{\prime}n_2-n_3n_1^{\prime})-\frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}}(l_3^{\prime}l_2-l_3l_1^{\prime})} \nonumber\\ &\quad \times e^{-\frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}^2}\left[ (n_1+l_1)(n_2l_1^{\prime}+n_1^{\prime}l_2)-2n_2n_1^{\prime}l_1-2n_1l_2l_1^{\prime} \right]}. \label{three_loop_s}\end{aligned}$$ The $\mathcal{S}$ and $\mathcal{T}$ matrices obtained in this way are the same as those obtained for the surface partition functions in our previous work, and other bulk calculations. @chen2015bulk [@WangLevin2015; @WangWen2015; @JiangMesarosRan2014; @WangLevin2014] ### The coupled $BF$ theory: wave function in terms of $\hat{\alpha}$ and $\hat{\Lambda}$ While we have succeeded, by using $B^I_i$, in constructing the ground state wave functions and in computing the $\mathcal{T}$ and $\mathcal{S}$ matrices, it is also worth trying to use $\Lambda^I_i$ instead of $B^I_i$ to construct wave functions. One motivation for this is that $\exp i \Lambda^I_i$ are the Wilson surface operators, while $\exp i \beta^I_i$ are not. Although $\Lambda_{i}^I$ may not commute with each other, $\hat{A}_1^1$, $\hat{A}_2^1$, $\hat{W}_3^1$, $\hat{A}_1^2$, $\hat{A}_2^2$ and $\hat{W}_3^2$ still commute with each other, and we can write down the eigenstates for them, $$\begin{aligned} &|\Psi_{n_i}^{l_i}\rangle= \frac{1}{\mathrm{K}}\sum_{\lambda_{1,2}} e^{\frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}} (\lambda_1n_3 + \lambda_2l_3) } \nonumber\\ &\quad \times (\hat{W}_3^1)^{\lambda_1}(\hat{W}_3^2)^{\lambda_2}(\hat{W}_1^1)^{n_1}(\hat{W}_1^2)^{l_1}(\hat{W}_2^1)^{n_2}(\hat{W}_2^2)^{l_2}|0\rangle \label{wave2}\end{aligned}$$ where $\lambda_1,\lambda_2,n_i,l_i\in\mathbb{Z}_{\mathrm{K}}$. Since $\hat{W}^I_i$ do not mutually commute, the ordering of $\hat{W}_i^I$ is important when generating a set of wave functions. We choose this particular order so that $\mathcal{S}$ and $\mathcal{T}$ matrices are the same as those calculated in the previous subsection. Notice that since $\hat{W}_i^I$ is invariant under the large gauge transformations, so is this wave function. The matrix elements of $\mathcal{S}_{13}$ can be calculated as $$\begin{aligned} &\langle\Psi_{n_i^{\prime}}^{l_i^{\prime}}|\mathcal{S}_{13}|\Psi_{n_i}^{l_i}\rangle= \frac{1}{\mathrm{K}^2}\sum_{\lambda_{1,2}, \lambda_{1,2}^{\prime}} e^{ \frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}} ( -\lambda_1^{\prime}n_3^{\prime} -\lambda_2^{\prime}l_3^{\prime} +\lambda_1n_3 +\lambda_2l_3 ) } \nonumber\\ &\quad \times \langle 0| (\hat{W}_2^2)^{-l_2^{\prime}}(\hat{W}_2^1)^{-n_2^{\prime}}(\hat{W}_3^2)^{-l_1^{\prime}}(\hat{W}_3^1)^{-n_1^{\prime}}(\hat{W}_1^2)^{\lambda_2^{\prime}}(\hat{W}_1^1)^{\lambda_1^{\prime}}\nonumber\\ &\quad \times (\hat{W}_3^1)^{\lambda_1}(\hat{W}_3^2)^{\lambda_2}(\hat{W}_1^1)^{n_1}(\hat{W}_1^2)^{l_1}(\hat{W}_2^1)^{n_2}(\hat{W}_2^2)^{l_2}|0\rangle\nonumber\\ & =\frac{1}{\mathrm{K}^2}\delta_{n_2,n_2^{\prime}}\delta_{l_2,l_2^{\prime}} e^{i\theta^{n_i^{\prime},n_i,l_i^{\prime},l_i}},\end{aligned}$$ where $\theta^{n_i^{\prime},n_i,l_i^{\prime},l_i}$ is the same as that in Eq. . One can then check that the modular $\mathcal{S}$ matrix also matches with the previous calculation in terms of $B^I_i$, Eq. . As for the $\mathcal{T}$ transformation, since $\hat{W}^I_1$ and $\hat{W}^I_3$ do not commute with each other, their transformation properties under the $\mathcal{T}$ transformation are more complicated. Using the knowledge that $\Lambda=\beta+\alpha\times\alpha$, we decompose $\hat{W}_i^I$ as $$\begin{aligned} \hat{W}_i^I=\hat{B}_i^I\hat{C}_i^I \quad \mbox{where}\quad \hat{C}_i^I= \exp\left(\frac{i\mathrm{q}_{\bar{I}}}{2\pi}\epsilon_{ijk}\hat{\alpha}_j^I\hat{\alpha}_k^{\bar{I}}\right).\end{aligned}$$ We propose that under the $\mathcal{T}$ transformation, $$\begin{aligned} (\hat{B}_1^I)^{n_1}(\hat{C}_1^I)^{n_1} \to (\hat{B}_1^I)^{n_1}(\hat{B}_3^I)^{n_1}(\hat{C}_1^I)^{n_1}(\hat{C}_3^I)^{n_1}.\end{aligned}$$ The above result can be rewritten in terms of the $\hat{W}_i^I$ operators as $$\begin{aligned} (\hat{W}_1^I)^{n_1}\to (\hat{W}_3^I)^{n_1/2}(\hat{W}_1^I)^{n_1}(\hat{W}_3^I)^{n_1/2}.\end{aligned}$$ According to this definition, under the $\mathcal{T}$ transformation, $|\Psi_{n_i}^{l_i}\rangle$ are transformed as $$\begin{aligned} &\mathcal{T}|\Psi_{n_i}^{l_i}\rangle =\frac{1}{\mathrm{K}}\sum_{\lambda_{1,2}} e^{ \frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}} (\lambda_1n_3 + \lambda_2l_3) } \nonumber\\ &\quad \times (\hat{W}_3^1)^{\lambda_1}(\hat{W}_3^2)^{\lambda_2}(\hat{W}_3^1)^{n_1/2}(\hat{W}_1^1)^{n_1}(\hat{W}_3^1)^{n_1/2}\nonumber\\ &\quad \times (\hat{W}_3^2)^{l_1/2} (\hat{W}_1^2)^{l_1}(\hat{W}_3^2)^{l_1/2}(\hat{W}_2^1)^{n_2}(\hat{W}_2^2)^{l_2}|0\rangle.\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, the $\mathcal{T}$ matrix is given by $$\begin{aligned} %\langle\Psi_{n_i^{\prime}}^{l_i^{\prime}}|\mathcal{T}|\Psi_{n_i}^{l_i}\rangle&=\delta_{n_i,n_i^{\prime}}\delta_{l_i,l_i^{\prime}} \mathcal{T}&=\delta_{n_i,n_i^{\prime}}\delta_{l_i,l_i^{\prime}} e^{ -\frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}}(n_3n_1+l_3l_1)-\frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}^2}(l\times n)(n_1-l_1)}.\end{aligned}$$ This also matches with the previous calculation Eq. . Four-loop braiding theory {#Four-loop braiding theory} ========================= The quartic theory ------------------ In this section, we consider the following $BF$ theory with quartic coupling: $$\begin{aligned} S&=\int_{\mathcal{M}} \Bigg[\frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi}\delta_{IJ}b^I\wedge da^J +\epsilon_{IJKL}\frac{\mathrm{p}}{4!} a^I\wedge a^J\wedge a^K\wedge a^L \nonumber \\ &\qquad -\delta_{IJ}b^I\wedge J_{qv}^J-\delta_{IJ}a^I\wedge J_{qp}^J \Bigg], %\nonumber \\ %&=\int_{\mathcal{M}} %\Bigg[\frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi}\delta_{IJ}b^I\wedge da^J %+\mathrm{p} a^1\wedge a^2\wedge a^3\wedge a^4 %\nonumber \\ %&\quad %-\delta_{IJ}b^I\wedge J_{qv}^J-\delta_{IJ}a^I\wedge J_{qp}^J %\Bigg] \label{action_quartic}\end{aligned}$$ where $I,J\in 1,2,3,4$. This action can be considered as describing a discrete (lattice) gauge theory with the gauge group $\mathbb{Z}_{\mathrm{K}}\times \mathbb{Z}_{\mathrm{K}}\times \mathbb{Z}_{\mathrm{K}}\times \mathbb{Z}_{\mathrm{K}}$. $\mathrm{p}$ is a parameter of the theory, and is given by $$\begin{aligned} \mathrm{p}=\frac{\mathrm{q} \mathrm{K}^3}{(2\pi)^3}, \quad \mathrm{q}=0,1,\ldots,\mathrm{K}-1. \label{p_def}\end{aligned}$$ We will show that the quartic theory realizes non-trivial four-loop braiding statistics. Our reasoning presented below parallels our discussion on three-loop braiding statistics realized in the cubic theory. ### Equations of motion The first term in the action describes the particle-loop braiding process, as in the ordinary $BF$ theory. On the other hand, as we will discuss, the second term describes four-loop braiding process. To develop understanding of the four-loop braiding process, let us first write down the equations of motion $$\begin{aligned} &\frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi}da^I=J_{qv}^I, \nonumber\\ &\frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi}db^I+\frac{\mathrm{p}}{6} \epsilon_{IJKL} a^J\wedge a^K\wedge a^L=J_{qp}^I. %&\frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi}db^1+\mathrm{p} a^2\wedge a^3\wedge a^4=J_{qp}^1\nonumber\\ %&\frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi}db^2-p a^1\wedge a^3\wedge a^4=J_{qp}^2\nonumber\\ %&\frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi}db^3+p a^1\wedge a^2\wedge a^4=J_{qp}^3\nonumber\\ %&\frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi}db^4+p a^1\wedge a^2\wedge a^3=J_{qp}^4 \label{eom_bulk}\end{aligned}$$ Let us consider a fixed static quasiparticle and quasivortex configuration and integrate the equation of motion over space. By solving the first equation of motion as $a^I=(2\pi/\mathrm{K})(d^{-1}J_{qv}^I)$, plugging the solution to the other equations of motion, and integrating over space $\Sigma$, $$\begin{aligned} & \frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi}\int_{\Sigma} db^I= \int_{\Sigma} J_{qp}^I \nonumber \\ &\quad - \frac{\mathrm{q}}{6} \epsilon_{IJKL} \int_{\Sigma}(d^{-1}J_{qv}^J)\wedge (d^{-1}J_{qv}^K)\wedge (d^{-1}J_{qv}^L). %\frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi}\int_{\Sigma} db^1&=-\mathrm{q}\int_{\Sigma}(d^{-1}J_{qv}^2)\wedge (d^{-1}J_{qv}^3)\wedge (d^{-1}J_{qv}^4)+J_{qp}^1\nonumber\\ %\frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi}\int_{\Sigma} db^2&=+ \mathrm{q} \int_{\Sigma}(d^{-1}J_{qv}^1)\wedge (d^{-1}J_{qv}^3)\wedge (d^{-1}J_{qv}^4)+J_{qp}^2\nonumber\\ %\frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi}\int_{\Sigma} db^3&=-\mathrm{q} \int_{\Sigma}(d^{-1}J_{qv}^1)\wedge (d^{-1}J_{qv}^2)\wedge (d^{-1}J_{qv}^4)+J_{qp}^3\nonumber\\ %\frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi}\int_{\Sigma} db^4&=+\mathrm{q}\int_{\Sigma}(d^{-1}J_{qv}^1)\wedge (d^{-1}J_{qv}^2)\wedge (d^{-1}J_{qv}^3)+J_{qp}^4 \label{eom_quartic}\end{aligned}$$ The second term on the right-hand side of the above equation comes from $$\begin{aligned} & \mathrm{Borr}(J^I_{qv},J^J_{qv},J^K_{qv}) \nonumber \\ &\quad = \int_{\Sigma} (d^{-1}J_{qv}^I)\wedge (d^{-1}J_{qv}^J)\wedge (d^{-1}J_{qv}^K).\end{aligned}$$ and involves three quasivortex loops. If any two of them are mutually unlinked, i.e., $d(a^I\wedge a^J)=0$, this term describes the triple linking number of the Borromean ring configuration and is a topological invariant. @Berger1990 [@2014JPhCS.544a2014B] As in the three-loop braiding theory, the equation of motion , suggests the Borromean ring 'dresses' the $I$-th quasiparticle (Fig. \[fig:fig0\]). To see that $\mathrm{Borr}$ is a topological invariant, let us introduce $g^K=\epsilon^{IJK}a^I\wedge a^J$. If we require that any two of the flux loops are mutually unlinked, i.e., $d(a^I\wedge a^J)=0$, this constraint leads to $g^K=du^K$, where $u^{K}$ is a one-form gauge field and describes the effective magnetic flux loop formed by $a^{I}$ and $a^J$. Then, $\mathrm{Borr}$ can be written as $$\begin{aligned} & \int_{\Sigma} a^1\wedge a^2\wedge a^3 \nonumber \\ & =\int_{\Sigma} a^1\wedge du^1 =\int_{\Sigma} a^2 \wedge du^2 =\int_{\Sigma} a^3\wedge du^3.\end{aligned}$$ This is equivalent to a Chern-Simons integral and describes the Hopf linking number between $da^k$ and $du^k$. ### Gauge invariance In the absence of sources, there are two sets of gauge transformations that leave the action invariant: The usual 1-form gauge transformation $$\begin{aligned} b^{I}\to b^{I}+d\zeta^{I}, \quad a^{I}\to a^{I}\end{aligned}$$ and a shifted 0-form gauge transformation $$\begin{aligned} a^{I}\to a^{I}+d\varphi^{I}, \quad b^{I}\to b^{I}+\frac{\pi \mathrm{p}}{3\mathrm{K}}\epsilon^{IJKL}(a^{J}\wedge a^{K})\varphi^{L}.\end{aligned}$$ Formally, these transformations can be read off by identifying the operators that generate the Gauss law constraints. Similar to the three-loop braiding theory described earlier, it seems that the coupling to currents is gauge non-invariant. However, by demanding gauge invariance, we can read off the topological currents. The terms with coupling to sources transform under the 0-form gauge transformations as $$\begin{aligned} & a^{I}\wedge J_{qp}^{I}+b^{I}\wedge J_{qv}^{I} \\ &\longrightarrow a^{I}\wedge J_{qp}^{I}+b^{I}\wedge J_{qv}^{I} \nonumber \\ &\quad -\varphi^{I}d\left[J_{qp}^{I} -\epsilon^{IJKL}\frac{\mathrm{q}}{6}d^{-1}J_{qv}^{J}\wedge d^{-1}J_{qv}^{K}\wedge d^{-1}J_{qv}^{L} \right]. \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ Hence we can read off the current conservation law $$\begin{aligned} d\left[J_{qp}^{I}-\epsilon^{IJKL} \frac{\mathrm{q}}{6}d^{-1}J_{qv}^{J}\wedge d^{-1}J_{qv}^{K}\wedge d^{-1}J_{qv}^{L} \right]=0. \label{conservation law four-loop}\end{aligned}$$ If all the pair of quasivortex loops are mutually unlinked, the first term on the right side describes the triple linking number for the borromean ring configuration. The above equations then indicate, as the equation of motion , that the effective particle comes from two parts, the real particle excitation and the Borromean ring configuration. On the other hand, the 1-form gauge symmetry furnishes the second 'ordinary' conservation law $dJ_{qv}^{I}=0$. ### Four-loop braiding statistics That the Borromean ring configuration can be treated as an effective particle, as seen from the equation of motion and the conservation law suggests the theory may realize non-trivial statistics involving four loop-like excitations (four-loop braiding statistics). Following three-loop braiding process, we postulate the four-loop braiding process as shown in Fig. \[fig:fig1\]. In Fig. \[fig:fig1\], we consider the loop $L_1$ and $L_2$ form an effective base loop $L_{12}$, with loop 3 and 4 are linked to $L_{12}$. Braiding $L_3$ around $L_4$ gives rise to a non-trivial phase $\sim n_1n_2n_3n_4/\mathrm{K}$. Furthermore, we can also understand this braiding process by treating loop $L_1$ as an base loop, with loops $L_2$, $L_3$ and $L_4$ linked to $L_1$ (Fig. \[fig:fig1\] (a)). Loop $L_2$ braids around $L_3$ and $L_4$. We will verify this argument shortly by computing the algebra of Wilson operators. ![ Four-loop braiding process in $3+1$ dimensions. (a) Loop 1, 2 and 3 form a Borromean ring configuration. Similarly, loop 1, 2 and 4 form a Borromean ring configuration. Alternatively, $L_1$ and $L_2$ form an effective loop $L_{12}$, with loop 3 and 4 are linked to $L_{34}$. In this case, it is the same as the three loop braiding process with $L_{12}$ as the base loop. Braiding $L_3$ around $L_4$ gives rise to a non-trivial phase $2\pi n_1n_2n_3n_4/\mathrm{K}$. (b) Loop $L_1$ is the base loop. $L_2$, $L_3$ and $L_4$ are linked with $L_1$. This braiding process can be understood by dimensional reduction to the $(2+1)$ dimensions in Fig. \[fig:fig1\] (c). <span data-label="fig:fig1"></span>](four_loop_braid.pdf) The last point of view can be better understood by considering dimensional reduction to one lower dimension as in Fig. \[fig:fig1\] (c). The dimensional reduction of the $(3+1)$ dimensional quartic theory leads to the following $(2+1)$ dimensional cubic theory, $$\begin{aligned} S=\int_{\mathcal{M}}\left[\frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi}\delta_{IJ}b^I\wedge da^J+\mathrm{p} a^1\wedge a^2\wedge a^3\right] \label{action_cubic}\end{aligned}$$ where $I,J=1,2,3$, $b^I$ and $a^I$ are one-form, and $\mathrm{p}$ equals to $\mathrm{p}=\mathrm{q}\mathrm{K}^2/(2\pi)^2$ where $\mathrm{q}=0,1,\ldots,\mathrm{K}-1$. The first term is the $BF$ theory and is related to the Hopf linking number for the particle current loops in $(2+1)$ dimensions, which describes the particle-particle braiding process. For the second term, if any two of particle current loops are mutually unlinked, it is the Borromean ring and describes the braiding process involving three particles. This braiding process has been discussed in Ref. and can be understood as in Fig. \[fig:fig2\]. ![ Three-particle braiding in $2+1$ dimensions. In (a), particle 1, 2 and 3 are labeled by three different colors red, green and blue. We braid particle 2 around 1 and 3 four times. The Wilson loops for particles 1, 2 and 3 are mutually unlinked. For instance, if there is no Wilson loop for particle 3, the braiding between 1 and 2 is trivial. Nevertheless, the three Wilson loops 1, 2 and 3 together form a Borromean ring in $2+1$ dimensions. In (b), we treat particle 2 and 3 as an effective particle and braid it around particle 1. This process is topologically equivalent to (a). (c) is the projection of (a) to the two dimensional spatial plane. The braiding of particle 2 around 1 is trivial if there is no particle 3.<span data-label="fig:fig2"></span>](three_particle_braid.pdf) The quadratic theory {#the-quadratic-theory} -------------------- As we did for the coupled $BF$ theories realizing the three-loop braiding, we can also consider an alternative quartic theory instead of the quartic theory. Let us consider: $$\begin{aligned} S &= \frac{\mathrm{K}}{2\pi} \int \delta_{IJ} b^I\wedge da^I \nonumber \\ &\quad - \int \delta_{IJ} a^I \wedge J^J_{qp} - \int \delta_{IJ}\Lambda^{I}\wedge J_{qv}^{J} %\left[ b^I + \epsilon_{IJKL} \frac{\mathrm{p}}{4} d^{-1} (a^J\wedge a^K \wedge a^L) \right] %\wedge J^M_{qv} %\nonumber \\ %&\quad %- \int \left[ b^1 - \frac{\mathrm{p}}{4} d^{-1} (a^2\wedge a^3 \wedge a^4) \right]\wedge J^1_{qv} %\nonumber \\ %&\quad %- \int \left[ b^2 + \frac{\mathrm{p}}{4} d^{-1} (a^1\wedge a^3 \wedge a^4) \right]\wedge J^2_{qv} %\nonumber \\ %&\quad %- \int \left[ b^3 - \frac{\mathrm{p}}{4} d^{-1} (a^1\wedge a^2 \wedge a^4) \right]\wedge J^3_{qv} %\nonumber \\ %&\quad %- \int \left[ b^4 + \frac{\mathrm{p}}{4} d^{-1} (a^1\wedge a^2 \wedge a^3) \right]\wedge J^4_{qv}\end{aligned}$$ where $I,J=1,\ldots, 4$ and $$\begin{aligned} \Lambda^{I}&:=b^{I}-\frac{\mathrm{p}}{3!}\epsilon^{IJKL} d^{-1}\left(a^J\wedge a^K\wedge a^L\right). %\nonumber \\ %B^{1}:=&\;b^{1}-\mathrm{p}d^{-1}\left(a^2\wedge a^3\wedge a^4\right) \nonumber \\ %B^{2}:=&\;b^{2}+\mathrm{p}d^{-1}\left(a^1\wedge a^3\wedge a^4\right) \nonumber \\ %B^{3}:=&\;b^{3}-\mathrm{p}d^{-1}\left(a^1\wedge a^2\wedge a^4\right) \nonumber \\ %B^{4}:=&\;b^{4}+\mathrm{p}d^{-1}\left(a^1\wedge a^2\wedge a^3\right)\end{aligned}$$ The equations of motion are the same as Eq. . Here, the precise meaning of the term $\int d^{-1}(a^J\wedge a^K\wedge a^L)\wedge J^I_{qv}$ can be understood by taking $J_{qv}= \delta(S)$, which gives rise to for example $ \int_{S} [b^1 -\mathrm{p} d^{-1}(a^2\wedge a^3\wedge a^4)] $. Looking for a volume $V$ which satisfies $\partial V=S$, this can be written as $ \int_{S} b^1 - \mathrm{p} \int_V(a^2\wedge a^3\wedge a^4) $. Using the quadratic theory, let us now discuss the algebra of the Wilson operators. The canonical commutators are the same as the ordinary $BF$ theory and hence $ \left[{\textstyle \int_C} a^I, {\textstyle \int_S} \Lambda^J\right]=(2\pi i/\mathrm{K})\delta^{IJ} I(C, S). $ On the other hand, the multiple commutators among $\int_{S}\Lambda^I$ are $$\begin{aligned} & \left[ \textstyle{\int_{S_1}} \Lambda^I, \textstyle{\int_{S_2}} \Lambda^J\right] \nonumber \\ & \qquad = (-\mathrm{p}\epsilon^{IJPQ}) \left[\frac{-2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}}\right] %\frac{12\pi i \mathrm{p}}{\mathrm{K}} %\int_{S_1\sharp V_2 + S_2\sharp V_1} a^P\wedge a^Q, \int_{\partial(V_1\sharp V_2)} a^P\wedge a^Q, \nonumber \\ & \left[\left[ \textstyle{\int_{S_1}} \Lambda^I, \textstyle{\int_{S_2}} \Lambda^J\right], \textstyle{\int}_{S_3}\Lambda^K\right] \nonumber \\ & \qquad = (-4\mathrm{p}\epsilon^{IJKQ}) \left[\frac{-2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}}\right]^2 %\frac{96\pi^2 \mathrm{p}}{\mathrm{K}^2} %\int_{(S_1\sharp V_2 + S_2\sharp V_1)\sharp S_3} a^Q, \int_{\partial (V_1 \sharp V_2)\sharp S_3} a^Q, \nonumber \\ & \left[ \left[\left[ \textstyle{\int_{S_1}} \Lambda^I, \textstyle{\int_{S_2}} \Lambda^J\right], \textstyle{\int}_{S_3}\Lambda^K\right] \textstyle{\int_{S_4}}\Lambda^L \right] \nonumber \\ & \qquad = (-4\mathrm{p} \epsilon^{IJKL}) \left[\frac{-2\pi i}{\mathrm{K}}\right]^3 %I((S_1\sharp V_2 + S_2\sharp V_1)\sharp S_3, S_4), I(\partial (V_1\sharp V_2)\sharp S_3, S_4),\end{aligned}$$ where we noted $d (\delta(V_1)\wedge\delta(V_2)) = \delta(S_1)\wedge \delta(V_2) + \delta(V_1)\wedge \delta(S_2)$. The four-loop braiding phase is encoded in the following product of Wilson operators $$\begin{aligned} & \left[(W^2W^1)^{\dag}W^1W^2\cdot W^3\cdot (W^1W^2)^{\dag}W^2W^1 \cdot W^{3\dag}\right] \nonumber \\ &\quad \cdot W^4\cdot\left[\cdots \right]^{\dag}\cdot W^{4\dag} \nonumber\\ &=\exp \left( \big[ \big[\big[i\textstyle{\int_{S_1}} \Lambda^1,i \textstyle{\int_{S_2}} \Lambda^2\big], i \textstyle{\int_{S_3}} \Lambda^3\big], i \textstyle{\int_{S_4}} \Lambda^4\big] \right).\end{aligned}$$ The Wilson operator algebra on $T^3$ ------------------------------------ It is also instructive to construct the Wilson operator algebra on a closed spatial manifold with non-trivial topology, e.g., $\Sigma=T^3$. We will work in the setting identical to the previous section, and quantize the theory on $\Sigma=T^3$. As before, we expand $a^I$ and $b^I$ by using the Hodge decomposition as $ a^I = \cdots + \alpha^I_l \omega_l, $ and $ b^I= \cdots + \beta^I_p \eta_p $, where $\alpha^I_l$ and $\beta^I_l$ are the zero modes. Also, as before, we consider Wilson operators associated to the generators $\{L^m\}$ and $\{S^m\}$ of the first and second homology groups. For $L^i$, we consider the Wilson loop operators $$\begin{aligned} \hat{A}^I_i := \exp i \int_{L^i} \hat{a}^I = \exp i \hat{\alpha}^I_i\end{aligned}$$ As for $S^m$'s, we consider Wilson surface operators $$\begin{aligned} W^1_i &:= \exp i \left( \int_{S^i} b^1 - \mathrm{p} \int_{\Sigma} a^2\wedge a^{3} \wedge a^4 \right) \quad \mbox{etc}.\end{aligned}$$ The cubic term can be written as, assuming $\Sigma$ is formal, $ \int_{\Sigma} a^I\wedge a^J \wedge a^K = \alpha^I_i \alpha^J_j \alpha^K_k \int_{\Sigma} \omega_i \wedge \omega_j \wedge \omega_k % \nonumber \\ % &= % \alpha^I_i \alpha^J_j \alpha^K_k % \epsilon_{jkp} % \int_{\Sigma} \omega_i \wedge \eta_p = \epsilon_{ijk} \alpha^I_i \alpha^J_j \alpha^K_k. $ Hence, the Wilson surface operators associated to $S^i$ are $$\begin{aligned} & \quad \hat{W}^I_i = \exp i \hat{\Lambda}^I_i \nonumber \\ & \mbox{where} \quad \Lambda^I_i = \beta^I_i - \mathrm{p} \epsilon^{IJKL}\epsilon_{ijk} \alpha^J_i \alpha^K_j \alpha^L_k % \nonumber \\ % \Lambda^2_i &= \beta^2_i + \mathrm{q} \epsilon_{ijk} \alpha^1_i \alpha^3_j \alpha^4_k % \nonumber \\ % \Lambda^3_i &= \beta^3_i - \mathrm{q} \epsilon_{ijk} \alpha^1_i \alpha^2_j \alpha^4_k % \nonumber \\ % \Lambda^4_i &= \beta^4_i + \mathrm{q} \epsilon_{ijk} \alpha^1_i \alpha^2_j \alpha^3_k\end{aligned}$$ The Wilson operator algebra can be computed as $$\begin{aligned} & (\hat{W}^2_2 \hat{W}^1_1)^{\dag} \hat{W}^1_1 \hat{W}^2_2 \nonumber \\ & \qquad = \exp ( [i\Lambda^1_1, i\Lambda^2_2]), \nonumber \\ & (\hat{W}^2_2 \hat{W}^1_1)^{\dag} \hat{W}^1_1 \hat{W}^2_2 \cdot \hat{W}^3_3 \cdot (\hat{W}^1_1 \hat{W}^2_2)^{\dag} \hat{W}^2_2 \hat{W}^1_1 \cdot \hat{W}^{3\dag}_3 % \nonumber \\ % &= % \exp\left(- [\Lambda^1_1,\Lambda^2_2] \right) % B^3_3 % \exp\left(- [\Lambda^1_1,\Lambda^2_2]^{\dag} \right) % B^{3\dag}_3 \nonumber \\ &\qquad = \exp ( [ [i\Lambda^1_1,i\Lambda^2_2],i \Lambda^{3}_3 ]), \nonumber \\ & \left[ (\hat{W}^2_2 \hat{W}^1_1)^{\dag} \hat{W}^1_1 \hat{W}^2_2 \cdot \hat{W}^3_3 \cdot (\hat{W}^1_1 \hat{W}^2_2)^{\dag} \hat{W}^2_2 \hat{W}^1_1 \cdot \hat{W}^{3\dag}_3 \right] \nonumber \\ &\quad \times \hat{W}^4_1 \times \left[ \cdots \right]^{\dag} \times
{'source': 'arXiv_out/1603'}