Let $ \mathcal C $ be a monoidal category. Then $ \mathcal C $ is both a left and right module category over itself. Moreover, the Drinfeld centre of $ \mathcal C $ can be defined as the category of functors from $ \mathcal C $ to itself which commute with these module category structures. $$ Z(\mathcal C) = Fun_{\mathcal C | \mathcal C}(\mathcal C, \mathcal C) $$

Suppose that $\mathcal C = H\text{-mod}$ where $H$ is a Hopf algebra. Then a well-known result identifies $ Z(\mathcal C) = D(H)\text{-mod}$ where $D(H) $ is the Drinfeld double of $ H$.

I am interested in the generalization of this result to the setting of more general module categories. Let $ \mathcal C $ be a monoidal category and let $ \mathcal M $ be a $ \mathcal C$-module category. Then we can consider the category of functors from $ \mathcal M $ to itself, compatible with the module structure: $$ \mathcal D = Fun_{\mathcal C}(\mathcal M, \mathcal M) $$

Assume that $ \mathcal C = H\text{-mod}$ and $ \mathcal M = A\text{-mod} $ where $H$ is a Hopf algebra, $ A$ is an algebra and $ A $ is also an $ H$-comodule (this comodule structure gives rise to the action of $ \mathcal C $ on $ \mathcal M $).

Question: Under this setup, can we realize $ \mathcal D $ as the module category of some algebra constructed from $ H $ and $ A $?

My question is motivated from the theory of lattice models in condensed matter physics. In the paper Models for gapped boundaries and domain walls by Kitaev and Kong, the authors consider a Levin-Wen model with input $ \mathcal C, \mathcal M $ as above. In this model, the category of functors $ \mathcal D $ is the category of boundary excitations. Moreover, in section 4 of this paper, the author construct an algebra whose module category is claimed to be equivalent to $ \mathcal D $. (Actually they just claim that simple objects correspond.) So I was wondering if these ideas had been developed in the mathematics literature.

| cite | improve this question | | | | |

Such an algebra exists. As far as I am aware, the algebra was first described in chapter 6 of The blob complex by Morrison and Walker. In this paper, the algebra is construct from a diagrammatic calculus for the module and tensor category rather than from $H$ and $A$ directly.

Since then, these algebras have appeared under many names in condensed matter physics, for example the "dube algebra" in Symmetry-enriched topological order in tensor networks: Defects, gauging and anyon condensation. From the physical perspective, the representations of these algebras (or sphere modules as they are called my Morrison and Walter) describe codimension 2 defects in the corresponding topological phase of matter.

| cite | improve this answer | | | | |
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I'm not sure whether to be more bothered that someone decided "dube" was a word, or that without needing to read the paper I knew that it must be a shortening of "defect tube." $\endgroup$ – Noah Snyder Sep 12 '18 at 22:44
  • $\begingroup$ I once had some coauthors who advocated for "fube algebra", meaning fermionic version of the tube algebra. "Fube" did not make it into the final version of that paper. $\endgroup$ – Kevin Walker Sep 13 '18 at 19:21

I think Davydov's papers Centre of an algebra and Full centre of an H-module algebra might be what you are looking for.

| cite | improve this answer | | | | |
  • $\begingroup$ These paper looks interesting, but don't seem relevant for my question (unless I am missing something). $\endgroup$ – Joel Kamnitzer Sep 15 '18 at 1:19
  • $\begingroup$ @JoelKamnitzer If I understood your question, it was "Given an algebra object $A$ in a nice monoidal category $\mathcal C$, how can I understand the the category of $A$-$A$ bimodules? In particular, can I understand it as the category of modules for some algebra $A'$ in some monoidal category $\mathcal C'$?" I think that you can take $\mathcal C' = \mathcal Z(\mathcal C)$, and, under some conditions on $A$, I think you can take $A' = Z(A)$. $\endgroup$ – Theo Johnson-Freyd Sep 16 '18 at 3:36

Section 1 (in particular Prop 1.23) of On module categories over finite-dimensional Hopf algebras by Andruskiewitsch-Mombelli come close to an answer to your question: namely, they show that if $H$ is a finite dimensional Hopf algebra, and $K,L$ f.d. comodules algebra algebra over $H$, then $Rep\ H$-linear right exact functor from $K-mod$ to $L-mod$ are $K-L$-bmodules in $H$-comodules.

They show this directly, but there is a general explanation. Note that your question has to be special to Hopf algebra (as opposed to general tensor categories) because the relation between $Rep\ H$ and $K-mod$ is somehow "external". One point of view I find illuminating, and hopefully might be useful to you if you want variant of this result, is the following: a comodule algebra $K$ is an $H^*$-module algebra hence becomes an algebra internal to the tensor category $C=Rep\ H^*$, so that you can talk about the category $K-mod_C$ of equivariant/internal $K$-modules. But it turns out $C$ and $D=Rep\ H$ are related by some sort of categorical Koszul duality, and this is where Hopf-ness is used crucially, because $C$ and $D$ are augmented by their fiber functor, ie Vect is a module over those.

Long story short, the assignment $$M \longmapsto Fun_C(Vect,M)$$ gives a 2-functorial equivalence between (appropriate adjectives) $C$-module categories and $D$-module categories. Now the above result follows from:

  • this equivalence maps $K-mod_C$, to just $K-mod$ as a $D$-module category, hence to answer your question we might as well compute $C$-module endofunctors of $K-mod_C$
  • but now we are in an "internal" situation, hence $C$-module functor from $K-mod_C$ to itself are given by internal $K$-bimodule (this is Eilenberg-Watts theorem ), i.e. $K$-bimodule in $H$-comodules.
| cite | improve this answer | | | | |
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the reference and explanation. So I guess the short answer to my question is that $$ Fun_{H-mod}(A-mod, A-mod) = (A, A) \text{-bimodules internal to $H$-comod}$$. Is the right hand side naturally modules over some algebra? $\endgroup$ – Joel Kamnitzer Sep 15 '18 at 1:35
  • $\begingroup$ Right, sorry if this was unclear. Also, I should have said that composition of functors corresponds to tensor product over $A$ so this takes care of the monoidal structure as well. As for whether it's modules over some algebra, it's definitely true if H-comod is braided (in which case you get modules over ths smash product $H^*\rtimes (A \tilde \otimes A^{op})$ where $\tilde \otimes$ is the braided tensor product and $op$ is also defined using the braiding. I'm unsure of the general case, though I might just missing something. $\endgroup$ – Adrien Sep 15 '18 at 8:45

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.