Conversation
|
After the build completes, the updated documentation will be available here |
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
|
Starts to look great; this will be a very useful addition. |
| ```math | ||
| \sum_g R^{ab}_g F^{abx}_{cg} R^{ax}_c = \sum_{f,h} F^{bax}_{cf} R^{af}_h F^{axb}_{ch} | ||
| ``` | ||
| and the analogous equation with ``a`` and ``b`` swapped. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There's more to it than just swapping a and b, but it's probably not worth going into it. Maybe meet halfway and say something about over- and underbraiding?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah, although I guess I really just need to sit down and put some actual figures together 😢
| | [`FermionNumber`](@ref) | fU₁ | Unique | Fermionic | Yes | Fermion number conservation | | ||
| | [`FermionSpin`](@ref) | fSU₂ | Simple | Fermionic | Yes | Fermions with spin symmetry | | ||
| | [`ProductSector`](@ref) | Product categories | Varies | Varies | Varies | Multiple simultaneous symmetries | | ||
| | [`TimeReversed`](@ref) | Inverted braiding | Varies | Varies | Varies | ?? | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Symmetries of the bra state or Drinfeld centers of modular tensor categories are what I can come up with on the spot
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I also wonder if the last column is really useful, but I guess it doesn't hurt to mention?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not even sure if this table is all that useful to begin with, but copilot generated it and I like how it looks...
|
Overall amazing work! The pages are pretty short, so I'm wondering if it's beneficial to have this depth to the headers? Also, do you think these docs should also mention the other packages supporting |
Co-authored-by: Boris De Vos <143942306+borisdevos@users.noreply.github.com>
3 participants
This is ongoing work to start properly documenting this package.
It is based on the work in TensorKit, credits go to @Jutho for that.
The docs now consist of two large parts: The first part defines the interface of
Sector, while the second is a list of the concrete types provided by this package.I think the first part fixes #56 and is somewhat ready for review.
I am pretty happy with the general lay-out, but comments are obviously more than welcome.
Many of the formulas will require checking for errors, I have been doing this on the side while waiting for other PRs, so many things will have slipped my full attention.
For the second part, (related to #57) I for now only filled out the
SU2Irreppage in an attempt to show what I had in mind to document the different conventions. Before I continue with the rest (or others can chime in), I wanted to get a round of review in.