arXiv:2010.11872v2 [math.QA] 30 Mar 2021 oua esrctgr (MTC) category tensor modular lrdata ular n o rie esrcategory tensor braided a for and ento 1.1 Definition fa T se .. B0].MC rvd cin ftemod the of actions provide MTCs [BK01]). e.g., (see, MTC an of eaiemnia etr ml unu group. quantum small center, monoidal relative ybsek K0] erfrterae oScin2fradis a for 2 Section to Take reader here. relevant the categories refer We [KL01]. Lyubashenko o-eiipestig ewr vra lerial clos algebraically an over work We setting. non-semisimple o-eiipeMC Ls0 L1,L1,Ng1.Bt nge in But, h Neg21]. LO17, algebras) GLO18, [Lus10, quasi-Hopf related MTCs of [ non-semisimple actions (and group groups class quantum mapping small and [FSS19], functors modular K0] otrcnl n[DRGG in non-se recently with most starting [KL01], applications, of list non-s growing their Moreover, to [Shi19]. in characterizations equivalent ra theo by results subfactor classification and low-d towards investigation Gan05], as Hua05, intense such [MS89, fields theory various field in formal appeared have MTCs Semisimple oeta h ento bv osntrqiesemisimplici require not does above definition the that Note e od n phrases. and words Key obgn e srcl h ansrcueo neeti this in interest of structure main the recall us let begin, To 2020 construction new establish to is article this of purpose The h ento fannsmsml T f[L1 a engive been has [KL01] of MTC non-semisimple a of definition The OSRCIGNNSMSML OUA AEOISWITH CATEGORIES MODULAR NON-SEMISIMPLE CONSTRUCTING ahmtc ujc Classification. Subject Mathematics eetbihwe ¨grcnrlzr nienon-semisimp inside M¨uger centralizers when establish We sacneune eoti odtosudrwihrelative which under conditions obtain we consequence, a As rus rie rneddulso ihl lerso dia of algebras repres Nichols categories. which of ular under doubles conditions Drinfeld derive braided further groups, r We include examples groups. that show tum also we and categories, modular Abstract. the , S and - Dfiiin .0 2.11) 2.10, (Definitions hsppri otiuint h osrcino non-semi of construction the to contribution a is paper This T rie rneddul,mdlrtno aeoy M¨uger c category, tensor modular double, Drinfeld braided mtie,asrcueta mre rmmteaia phys mathematical from emerged that structure a -matrices, OETLUWT N HLE WALTON CHELSEA AND LAUGWITZ ROBERT EAIEMNIA CENTERS MONOIDAL RELATIVE vect ` if 9,t h td flgrtmccnomlfil hois[HL theories field conformal logarithmic of study the to 19], C k C let , ob h esrctgr ffinite-dimensional of category tensor the be to snndgnrt (i.e., non-degenerate is 82,1M5 17B37. 18M15, 18M20, 1. C . 1 Take Introduction ethe be C 1 M¨uger center rie nt esrctgr.W call We category. tensor finite braided a iipetplgclqatmfil theories field quantum topological misimple k(e,eg,[RSW09]). e.g., (see, nk msml Tsaegiigtato due traction gaining are MTCs emisimple emdlrctgre r lomodular. also are categories modular le oa ye ie(o-eiipe mod- (non-semisimple) give type, gonal oodlcnesgv (non-semisimple) give centers monoidal peetto aeoiso ml quan- small of categories epresentation dfield ed C nain fmr eea quantum general more of entations MS0.Sm ouectgre of categories module Some LMSS20]. fmdlrtno aeoisi the in categories tensor modular of s v ensont il xmlsof examples yield to shown been ave 1 y[L0] hyhv enunder been have they [KLM01]; ry y stecmol sddefinition used commonly the as ty, » of uso fvrostpso tensor of types various of cussion mninltplg Tr2,con- [Tur92], topology imensional ea,nnsmsml Tsare MTCs non-semisimple neral, vect C ok hc sdet Kerler– to due is which work, k ute utfiainthrough justification further n lrgoptog their though group ular . ipemdlrcategories. modular simple se(2.4)). (see k n ribbon. and ) nrlzr ihl algebra Nichols entralizer, k vco spaces, -vector c [MS89]. ics mod- Z14], C a 2 ROBERT LAUGWITZ AND CHELSEA WALTON not well-understood via classification nor examples, and we aim to contribute to the latter in this work. One of the main examples of an MTC in the semisimple setting is the monoidal center ZpCq [Section 2.4] of a trace-spherical tensor category C [Section 2.2] (often referred to as a spherical category) [BW99]. We discuss in Section 3 a non-semisimple generalization of this result, due to Shimizu, which we will employ later in our main results. First, we recall the set of square roots of the Radford isomorphism of a finite tensor category, denoted by SqrtC pD,ξDq here [Definition 3.3] that Shimizu uses to parameterize ribbon structures for ZpCq [Theorem 3.5]. This recovers a result Kauffman–Radford for the ribbonality of the Drinfeld double [Theorem 3.6]; see Proposition 3.8 for the explicit connection between these theorems. Next, we recall Douglas–Schommer-Pries–Snyder’s notion of sphericality [DSPS18] in the non-semisimple setting [Definition 3.9]. By [Shi18], this notion of sphericality implies that SqrtC pD,ξDq is non-empty [Remark 3.11]. We provide equivalent conditions for the representation category of a Hopf algebra to be spherical [Proposition 3.12]. Moreover, we obtain the following result.

Proposition 1.2 (Proposition 3.13). Any unimodular finite ribbon category is spherical in the sense of [DSPS18].

Shimizu’s results from [Shi19] on the modularity of ZpCq are recalled in Theorem 3.14 and Corollary 3.15— the hypotheses are, respectively, that SqrtC pD,ξDq is non-empty and that C is spherical (as in [DSPS18]). We build on the results on ZpCq above to obtain Theorem 1.4 below on the modularity of relative monoidal centers. Before this, we establish a general result on the modularity of M¨uger centralizer, Theorem 1.3. These are the main results of the paper, presented in Section 4. To proceed, note that a full subcategory of a category is called topologizing if it is closed un- der finite direct sums and subquotients [Ros95, Shi19]. Moreover, recall the notion of the M¨uger centralizer of a subset of objects in a braided category; see (4.1).

Theorem 1.3 (Theorem 4.3). Let D be a modular category, let E be a topologizing braided tensor subcategory of D, and consider the M¨uger centralizer CDpEq. Then, 1 1 CDpEq » E .

As a consequence, CDpEq is modular if and only if E is modular.

This generalizes a result of M¨uger in the semisimple case [M¨ug03b, Corollary 3.5]. Next we discuss a special case of M¨uger centralizers: relative monoidal centers. Take a braided B „ B B ´1 „ category p , ψX,Y : X b Y Ñ Y b Xq with braided opposite :“ p , ψY,X : X b Y Ñ Y b Xq. We say that a monoidal category C is B-central if there exists a faithful braided monoidal functor G: B Ñ ZpCq [Definition 4.4]. With such a category C, one can form the relative monoidal center ZBpCq, which is a full subcategory of ZpCq consisting of objects that centralize (via the braiding of ZpCq) all objects in the image of G [Definition 4.7]. In fact, ZBpCq is equal to the M¨uger centralizer CZpCqpGpBqq [Remark 4.8]. Given Theorem 1.3, we obtain the following result. Theorem 1.4 (Theorem 4.14). Let B be a non-degenerate braided finite tensor category, and C a B-central finite tensor category so that the set SqrtC pD,ξDq from Definition 3.3 is non-empty. If CONSTRUCTINGNON-SEMISIMPLEMODULARCATEGORIES 3 the full image GpBq is a topologizing subcategory of ZpCq, then the relative monoidal center ZBpCq is modular. For B a rigid braided category and H a Hopf algebra in B, Theorem 1.4 can be used to study the modularity of the category of finite-dimensional H-Yetter Drinfeld modules in B [Example 4.12]. If, further, B is a representation category of a quasi-triangular Hopf algebra K, then Theorem 1.4 can also be used to study the modularity of the representation category of the braided Drinfeld double ˚ DrinKpH,H q [Example 4.13]. From this, we show, as a first example, that the representation category of the small quantum group uqpsl2q, for q a root of unity of odd order, is an MTC [Example 5.3]. Generalizations of this (non-semisimple) MTC will be given in Proposition 1.7 below. Motivated again by work of M¨uger in the semisimple case, we next consider the decomposition of modular tensor categories into Deligne tensor product of modular subcategories. We obtain the result below; cf., [M¨ug03b, Theorem 4.2]. Theorem 1.5 (Theorem 4.17). Let D be a modular tensor category, with a topologizing non- degenerate braided tensor subcategory E. Then, there is an equivalence of ribbon categories:

D » E ⊠ CDpEq. In particular, under the conditions of Theorem 1.4, the relative monoidal center is related to the monoidal center through the factorization

ZpCq» B ⊠ ZBpCq. Continuing an example mentioned above, for H a Hopf algebra in the braided tensor category ˚ K-mod, we have that DrinpH ⋊ Kq-mod » K-mod ⊠ DrinK pH,H q-mod as modular categories under the hypotheses of Theorem 1.4; see Example 4.18(2). As in [M¨ug03b], we call a modular tensor category C in the non-semisimple setting prime if every topologizing non-degenerate braided tensor subcategory is equivalent to either C or vectk. We obtain the result below as an immediate consequence of the theorem above, cf. [M¨ug03b, Theorem 4.5]. Corollary 1.6 (Corollary 4.20). Every modular tensor category is equivalent to a finite Deligne tensor product of prime modular categories. Although primality is difficult to detect in the semisimple case (see [M¨ug03b, Section 4]), we ˚ inquire when it holds in the non-semisimple case, particularly for DrinK pH,H q-mod in the example above; see Question 4.21. Finally, we construct several examples of non-semisimple MTCs, via Theorem 1.4, by using Nichols algebras of diagonal type in braided categories of comodules over finite abelian groups. Proposition 1.7 (Proposition 5.15). Take K :“ kG, for G a finite abelian group, assume that char k “ 0, and take B a finite-dimensional Nichols algebra of diagonal type in a certain braided category B of K-comodules. Consider the relative monoidal center, D :“ ZBpB-modpBqq, or equiv- ˚ alently the category of finite-dimensional modules over the braided Drinfeld double DrinK˚ pB , Bq. Then, D is modular when (i) the canonical symmetric bilinear form b on the coquasi-triangular Hopf algebra K is non-degenerate, and (ii) certain conditions involving elements of the top degree of B and on the dual R-matrix of K are satisfied. 4 ROBERT LAUGWITZ AND CHELSEA WALTON

Note that the Drinfeld double of the bosonization of Nichols algebras has been studied in the literature, see e.g. [Hec10], where two copies of the group algebra consitute the Cartan part. In this paper, an approach is used where the Cartan part consists of a simple (dual) group algebra K˚. We end the paper by constructing, via Proposition 1.7, examples of non-semisimple modular tensor categories attached to Nichols algebras of Cartan type [Example 5.17] and not of Cartan type [Example 5.18]. The former includes the representation category of the small quantum group uqpgq at an odd root of unity. Thus, the methods developed in this paper provide an alternative argument showing that the category of finite-dimensional uqpgq-modules is a non-semisimple MTC, which was previously obtained in [Lyu95, Section A.3]. See also [LO17, GLO18] for more general results on the modularity of representation categories of small quantum groups. On the other hand, the non-semisimple MTCs in Example 5.18 illustrate that our methods can be used to analyze the modularity of representation categories attached to a broader class of Nichols algebras beyond small quantum groups.

2. Preliminaries on Monoidal Categories In this section, we review terminology pertaining to monoidal categories. We refer the reader to [BK01], [EGNO15], and [TV17] for general information. We recall monoidal categories and module categories [Section 2.1], various types of rigid categories [Section 2.2], finite tensor categories [Section 2.3], various braided monoidal categories [Section 2.4], algebraic structures in finite tensor categories [Section 2.5], ribbon monoidal categories [Section 2.6], and modular tensor categories in the non-semisimple setting [Section 2.7]. We assume that all categories here are locally small (i.e., the collection of morphisms between any two objects is a set), and that all categories here are abelian. A full subcategory of a category is called topologizing if it is closed under finite direct sums and subquotients [Ros95, Section 3.5.3], [Shi19, Definition 4.3]. Given a functor F : C Ñ D between two categories C and D, the full image of F is the full subcategory of D on all objects isomorphic to an object of the form F pCq for C in C.

2.1. Monoidal categories, monoidal functors, and module categories. We refer the reader to [EGNO15, Sections 2.1–2.6 and 7.1] and [TV17, Sections 1.1–1.4] for further details of the items discussed here. A monoidal category consists of a category C equipped with a bifunctor b: C ˆ C Ñ C, a natural „ isomorphism αX,Y,Z : pX b Y qb Z Ñ X b pY b Zq for each X,Y,Z P C, an object 1 P C, and „ „ natural isomorphisms lX : 1 b X Ñ X and rX : X b 1 Ñ X for each X P C, such that the pentagon and triangle axioms hold. By MacLane’s coherence theorem, we will assume that all monoidal categories are strict in the sense that pX b Y qb Z “ X b pY b Zq and 1 b X “ X “ X b 1, for all X,Y,Z P C; that is, αX,Y,Z , lX , rX are identity maps. For a monoidal category pC, b, 1q, define the opposite monoidal category to Cbop “ pC, bop, 1q where X bop Y :“ Y b X.

A (strong) monoidal functor pF, F´,´, F0q between monoidal categories pC, bC , 1C q to pD, bD, 1Dq „ is a functor F : C Ñ D equipped with a natural isomorphism FX,Y : F pXqbD F pY q Ñ F pX bC Y q „ for all X,Y P C, and an isomorphism F0 : 1C Ñ F p1C q in D, that satisfy associativity and unitality CONSTRUCTINGNON-SEMISIMPLEMODULARCATEGORIES 5 constraints. An equivalence of monoidal categories is provided by a monoidal functor between the two monoidal categories that yields an equivalence of the underlying categories. Representations of monoidal categories are provided by the next notion. A left C-module category is a category M equipped with a bifunctor b: C ˆM Ñ M, natural isomorphisms for associativity mX,Y,M : pX b Y qb M Ñ X b pY b Mq, for all X,Y P C, M P M satisfying the pentagon axiom, and for each M P M a natural isomorphism 1 b M Ñ M satisfying the triangle axiom.

2.2. Rigid, pivotal, and trace-spherical monoidal categories. We refer to [EGNO15, Sec- tions 2.10 and 4.7] and [TV17, Sections 1.5–1.7] for further details of the items discussed below. A monoidal category pC, b, 1q is rigid if it comes equipped with left and right dual objects, i.e., for ˚ ˚ each X P C there exist, respectively, an object X P C with co/evaluation maps evX : X b X Ñ 1 ˚ ˚ ˚ and coevX : 1 Ñ X b X , as well as an object X P C with co/evaluation maps evX : X b X Ñ 1, ˚ coevX : 1 Ñ X b X, satisfying the usual coherence conditions of left and right duals. An object r X in a rigid monoidal category C is invertible if evX and coevX are isomorphisms. Ć „ ˚˚ A rigid monoidal category is pivotal if it is equipped with isomorphisms jX : X Ñ X natural in X and satisfying jXbY “ jX b jY for all X,Y P C. Equivalently, a pivotal category is a rigid monoidal category such that the functors of left and right duality coincide as monoidal functors [TV17, Section 1.7]. The quantum dimension of an object X of a pivotal (rigid) monoidal category pC, b, 1, jq is defined to be dimjpXq“ evX˚ pjX bIdX˚ qcoevX P EndC p1q. A pivotal monoidal category pC, b, 1, jq ˚ is trace-spherical if dimjpXq“ dimjpX q for each X P C.

2.3. Finite tensor categories. Recall that k is an algebraically closed field. We now discuss certain k-linear monoidal categories following the terminologies of [EGNO15, Sections 1.8, 7.1– 7.3, 7.9].

A k-linear abelian category C is locally finite if, for any two objects V,W in C, HomC pV,W q is a finite-dimensional k-vector space and every object has a finite filtration by simple objects. Moreover, we say that C is finite if there are finitely many isomorphism classes of simple objects. Equivalently, C is locally finite if it is equivalent to the category of finite-dimensional comodules over a k-coalgebra (or, to modules over a finite-dimensional k-algebra if C is finite). A tensor category is a locally finite, rigid, monoidal category pC, b, 1q such that b is k-linear in each slot and 1 is a simple object of C. A tensor functor is a k-linear exact monoidal functor between tensor categories.

An example of a finite tensor category is vectk, the category of finite-dimensional k-vector spaces. More generally, the category H-mod of finite-dimensional k-modules over a (finite-dimensional) Hopf algebra H is a (finite) tensor category. We will use the following tensor product of finite tensor categories. The Deligne tensor product of two finite abelian categories is the abelian category C ⊠ D equipped with a bifunctor ⊠: C ˆ D Ñ C ⊠ D, pX,Y q ÞÑ X ⊠ Y , right exact in both variables so that for any abelian category A and any bifunctor F : C ˆ D Ñ A right exact in both slots, there exists a unique right exact functor F : C ⊠ D Ñ A with F ˝ ⊠ “ F [Del90, Section 5]. It is monoidal when both C and D are so, via C⊠D C D (2.1) pX ⊠ Y qb pX1 ⊠ Y 1q :“ pX b X1q ⊠ pY b Y 1q, 6 ROBERT LAUGWITZ AND CHELSEA WALTON for all X, X1 P C and Y,Y 1 P D, and with the unit object 1C ⊠ 1D. If C, D are finite tensor categories, then so is C ⊠ D. Given two tensor functors F : C Ñ D and F 1 : C1 Ñ D1 between finite tensor categories, there exists an induced tensor functor F ⊠ F 1 : C ⊠ C1 Ñ D ⊠ D1. For a tensor category C over k, a left module category over C is a module category M as in Section 2.1 with the requirement that M is also k-linear and abelian so that the underlying bifunctor is k-linear on morphisms and exact in the first variable (it is always exact in the second variable). An internal Hom object for a module category M over a k-linear, finite, tensor category C is an object HompM1, M2q in C, for M1, M2 P M, that represents the left exact functor C Ñ vectk, defined by X ÞÑ HomMpX b M1, M2q. Namely, we have a natural isomorphism: HomMpX b M1, M2q – HomC pX, HompM1, M2qq. 2.4. Braided monoidal categories, the monoidal center ZpCq, and the M¨uger center C1. Here, we discuss braided tensor categories and related constructions, and refer the reader to [BK01, Chapter 1], [EGNO15, Sections 8.1–8.3, 8.5, 8.20], and [TV17, Sections 3.1 and 5.1] for more information. A braided tensor category pC, b, 1, cq is a tensor category equipped with a natural isomorphism „ cX,Y : X b Y Ñ Y b X for each X,Y P C such that the hexagon axioms hold. By a braided tensor subcategory of a braided tensor category C we mean a subcategory of C containing the unit object of C, closed under the tensor product of C, and containing the braiding isomorphisms. A braided tensor functor between braided tensor categories C and D is a tensor functor pF, F˚,˚, F0q: C Ñ D so D C C that FY,X cF pXq,F pY q “ F pcX,Y q FX,Y for all X,Y P . An equivalence of braided tensor categories is a braided tensor functor between the two tensor categories that yields an equivalence of the underlying categories. An important example of a braided tensor category is the monoidal center (or Drinfeld center) ZpCq of a tensor category pC, b, 1q: its objects are pairs pV, cV,´q where V is an object of C and „ cV,X : V b X Ñ X b V is a natural isomorphism (called a half-braiding) satisfying cV,XbY “ pIdX b cV,Y qpcV,X b IdY q. An important feature of ZpCq is the braiding defined by „ cpV,cV,´q,pW,cW,´q :“ cV,W : V b W Ñ W b V. Proposition 2.2 (see [EGNO15, Section 7.13]). If C is a (finite) tensor category, then ZpCq is a braided (finite) tensor category.  C C D D Given two braided finite tensor categories pC, b , 1C , c q and pD, b , 1D, c q, the Deligne tensor product C ⊠ D is a braided finite tensor category. The braiding is obtained from C ⊠ D C 1 ⊠ D 1 1 C ⊠ 1 D (2.3) cX⊠Y,X1⊠Y 1 “ cX,X1 cY,Y 1 : pX b X q pY b Y q Ñ pX b Xq pY b Y q for all X, X1 P C, Y,Y 1 P D. We need to consider later the M¨uger center of a braided tensor category pC, b, 1, cq, which is the full subcategory on the objects 1 (2.4) ObpC q :“ tX P C | cY,X cX,Y “ IdXbY for all Y P Cu. 2.5. Algebraic structures in tensor categories. In this section, let C :“ pC, b, 1q be a tensor category over k. Assume that all structures below are k-linear as well. CONSTRUCTINGNON-SEMISIMPLEMODULARCATEGORIES 7

2.5.1. (Co)algebras and their (co)modules. We discuss in this part algebras and coalgebras in C and their (co)modules. More information is available in [EGNO15, Section 7.8] and [TV17, Section 6.1]. An algebra in C is an object A P C equipped with two morphisms m: A b A Ñ A (multiplication) and u: 1 Ñ A (unit) satisfying mpm b IdAq “ mpIdA b mq and mpu b IdAq “ IdA “ mpIdA b uq. We denote by AlgpCq the category of algebras in C, where morphisms in AlgpCq are morphisms 1 f : A Ñ A in C so that f mA “ mA1 pf b fq and f uA “ uA1 .

Given an algebra A in C, a left A-module in C is a pair pV, aV q for V an object in C and

aV : A b V Ñ V, a morphism in C satisfying aV pm b IdV q“ aV pIdA b aV q and aV pu b IdV q“ IdV . A morphism of A-modules pV, aV q Ñ pW, aW q is a morphism V Ñ W in C that intertwines with aV and aW . This way, we define the category A-modpCq of left A-modules in C. Analogously, we define mod-ApCq, the category of right A-modules in C. A coalgebra in C is an object C P C equipped with two morphisms ∆: C Ñ C b C (comultiplica- tion) and ε: C Ñ 1 (counit) satisfying p∆bIdC q∆ “ pIdC b ∆q∆ and pεbIdC q∆ “ IdC “ pIdC b εq∆. Dual to above, we can define the category CoalgpCq of coalgebras and their morphisms in C, and given C P CoalgpCq we can define categories, C-comodpCq and comod-CpCq, of left and right C- comodules in C, respectively. For V P C-comodpCq, the left C-coaction map is denoted by

δV : V Ñ C b V.

2.5.2. Bialgebras and Hopf algebras. In this part, let C :“ pC, b, 1, cq be a braided tensor category over k. We define bialgebras and Hopf algebras in C here, and more details can be found [TV17, Sections 6.1 and 6.2]. A bialgebra in C is a tuple H :“ pH, m, u, ∆, εq where pH, m, uq P AlgpCq and pH, ∆, εq P CoalgpCq so that ∆m “ pm b mqpId b c b Idqp∆ b ∆q, ∆u “ u b u, εm “ ε b ε, and εu “ Id1. We denote by BialgpCq the category of bialgebras in C, where morphisms in BialgpCq are morphisms in C that belong to AlgpCq and CoalgpCq simultaneously. A Hopf algebra is a tuple H :“ pH, m, u, ∆,ε,Sq, where pH, m, u, ∆, εq P BialgpCq and S : H Ñ H is a morphism in C (called an antipode) so that mpS b IdH q∆ “ mpIdH b Sq∆ “ uε. We denote by HopfAlgpCq the category of Hopf algebras in C, where morphisms are morphisms in BialgpCq. We assume that all Hopf algebras in this work have an invertible antipode, that is, there exists a ´1 ´1 ´1 morphism S : H Ñ H is a morphism in C so that SS “ IdH “ S S.

2.5.3. (Co)modules over Hopf algebras. Now we discuss (co)modules over Hopf algebras H in a braided tensor category pC, b, 1, cq. We refer the reader to [EGNO15, Sections 7.14, 7.15, 8.3] and [Bes97, Section 3] for more details. If V,W are left H-modules in C, then so is the tensor product V b W , via the action (2.5) below:

(2.5) aV bW :“ paV b aW qpIdH b cH,V b IdW qp∆H b IdV bW q.

This makes the category H-modpCq a monoidal category, with unit object p1 “ k, a1 “ εH b Id1q. ˚ Assume that C is rigid, and take pV, aV q P H-modpCq. Then its left dual pV , aV ˚ q P H-modpCq ˚ C ´1 is defined using SH , and its right dual p V, a˚V q P H-modp q is defined using SH . It follows that H-modpCq is a (finite) tensor category provided C is a (finite) braided tensor category. 8 ROBERT LAUGWITZ AND CHELSEA WALTON

For one supply of braided tensor categories, take the category H-modpvectkq for H a finite- dimensional k-Hopf algebra. We say that H is quasi-triangular if it comes equipped with an invertible element R “ Rp1q b Rp2q P H b H satisfying op ´1 p∆ b IdqpRq“ R13R23, pId b ∆qpRq“ R13R12, ∆ phq“ R∆phqR , for h P H, op where ∆ is the opposite coproduct. It follows that H-modpvectkq is a braided tensor category if and only if the finite-dimensional Hopf algebra H is quasi-triangular; here, the braiding is given by p2q p1q cV,W pv b wq“ aW pR b wqb aV pR b vq, for pV, aV q, pW, aW q P H-modpvectkq. We say that H is coquasi-triangular if it comes equipped with a convolution-invertible bilinear form r : H b H Ñ k satisfying

rph,kℓq“ rphp1q,ℓqrphp2q, kq, rpℓh, kq“ rpℓ, kp1qqrph, kp2qq,

rphp1q,ℓp1qqhp2qℓp2q “ ℓp1qhp1qrphp2q,ℓp2qq, h,k,ℓ P H (see e.g. [Maj00, Definition 2.2.1]). It follows that H-comodpvectkq is a braided tensor category if and only if the finite-dimensional Hopf algebra H is coquasi-triangular; here, the braiding is given by cV,W pv b wq “ pr b IdW b IdV qpIdH b τ b IdV qpδW b δV qpw b vq for pV, δV q, pW, δW q P H-comodpvectkq and τpa b bq“ b b a. For another supply of braided tensor categories, take a Hopf algebra H in C, and consider H the category of H-Yetter–Drinfeld modules in C, denoted by H YDpCq, which consists of objects pV, aV , δV q, where pV, aV q P H-modpCq with left H-coaction in C denoted by δV : V Ñ H b V , subject to compatibility condition:

pmH b aV qpIdH b cH,H b IdV qp∆H b δV q

“ pmH b IdV qpIdH b cV,H qpδV b IdH qpaV b IdH qpIdH b cH,V qp∆H b IdV q. H A morphism f : pV, aV , δV q Ñ pW, aW , δW q in H YDpCq is given by a morphism f : V Ñ W in C that H belongs to H-modpCq and H-comodpCq. Given two objects pV, aV , δV q and pW, aW , δW q in H YDpCq, their tensor product is given by pV b W, aV bW , δV bW q, where aV bW as in (2.5) and

δV bW “ pmH b IdV bW qpIdH b cH,V b IdW qpδV b δW q. H C YD C The category H YDp q is braided with braiding given by cV,W “ paW b IdV qpIdH b cV,W qpδV b IdW q. H Further, when C “ vectk and dimk H ă 8, we get that H YDpvectkq is equivalent to the braided tensor category of modules over the Drinfeld double, DrinpHq, see e.g. [Maj00, Theorem 7.1.2] and cf. Example 4.13 below with K “ k.

2.6. Ribbon tensor categories. In this section we assume that C :“ pC, b, 1, cq is a braided tensor category, and we refer the reader to [BK01, Chapter 2], [EGNO15, Sections 8.9–8.11], [TV17, Section 3.3], and [Rad12, Chapter 12] for details of the discussion below. A braided tensor category pC, b, 1, cq is ribbon (or tortile) if it is equipped with a natural iso- „ ˚ morphism θX : X Ñ X (a twist) satisfying θXbY “ pθX b θY q ˝ cY,X ˝ cX,Y and pθX q “ θX˚ for all X,Y P C. A functor (or, equivalence) of ribbon categories is a functor (respectively, equivalence) C D C D C F : Ñ of braided tensor categories such that F pθX q “ θF pXq, for any X P , cf. [Shu94, Sec- tion 1]. CONSTRUCTINGNON-SEMISIMPLEMODULARCATEGORIES 9

In a ribbon category pC, b, 1,c,θq, consider the Drinfeld isomorphism: „ ˚˚ (2.6) φX “ pIdX˚˚ b evX qpcX˚,X˚˚ b IdX qpcoevX˚ b IdX q: X Ñ X . Then, „ ˚˚ (2.7) jX :“ φX θX : X Ñ X defines a pivotal structure on C.

For a supply of ribbon categories, consider the category H-modpvectkq for H “ pH,Rq a finite- dimensional quasi-triangular k-Hopf algebra. We say that H is a ribbon Hopf algebra if there exists a central invertible element v P H satisfying ´1 (2.8) ∆pvq “ pR21Rq pv b vq, εpvq“ 1, Spvq“ v. This definition is equivalent to the one given in [RT90, Section 3.3], [Rad12, Definition 12.3.5]. It follows that H-modpvectkq is a ribbon category if and only if H is a ribbon Hopf algebra [Maj00, Corollary 9.3.4]. In this case, the ribbon twist is given by the action of v´1. The following lemma will be of use.

Lemma 2.9. Take D a braided full tensor subcategory of a braided tensor category C. If C is ribbon, then so is D. 

This result is obtained by restricting the ribbon structure from C to D. Moreover, the ribbon structure of the monoidal center ZpCq will be discussed later in Section 3.2.

2.7. Modular tensor categories. In the section, we discuss a notion of a modular tensor category for the non-semisimple setting. This is based on work of Kerler–Lyubashenko [KL01] and recent work of Shimizu [Shi19]. To proceed, we adopt the definition of non-degeneracy below, which extends the notion of non-degeneracy in the semisimple setting; see [EGNO15, Definition 8.19.2 and Theorem 8.20.7].

Definition 2.10 ([Shi19, Theorem 1]). We call a braided finite tensor category pC, b, 1, cq non- 1 degenerate if its M¨uger center C is equal to vectk. „ Next we discuss a characterization of non-degeneracy. Let pC, cX,Y : X b Y Ñ Y b Xq be a braided tensor category, and take the braided tensor category: C C ´1 „ :“ p , cY,X : X b Y Ñ Y b Xq. C Z C C Z C ´1 The assignments Ñ p q, X ÞÑ pX, cX,´q, and Ñ p q, X ÞÑ pX, c´,X q, extend to a braided tensor functor C ⊠ C Ñ ZpCq. If this functor yields an equivalence between the braided tensor categories C ⊠ C and ZpCq, then we say that pC, b, 1, cq is factorizable. A braided finite tensor category is non-degenerate if and only if it is factorizable [Shi19, Theorem 4.2]; note that this article also provides a third equivalent characterization of non-degeneracy in terms of a non-degenerate form on the coend. Moreover, the following type of tensor categories are of primary interest in this work.

Definition 2.11 ([KL01, Definition 5.2.7], [Shi19, Section 1]). A braided finite tensor category is called modular if it is non-degenerate and ribbon. 10 ROBERT LAUGWITZ AND CHELSEA WALTON

Now consider the braided finite tensor category H-modpvectkq for H a finite-dimensional, quasi- triangular Hopf algebra over k. We get that H-modpvectkq is modular precisely when H is ribbon and factorizable [EGNO15, Proposition 8.11.2 and Example 8.6.4].

Remark 2.12. By Lemma 2.9, we obtain that a topologizing non-degenerate braided tensor sub- category of a modular category is also modular.

Remark 2.13. It is straight-forward to show that if C and D are modular, then so is C ⊠ D via the monoidal structure (2.1), the braiding (2.3), and with ribbon structure θC⊠D :“ θC ⊠ θD.

3. Non-semisimple spherical categories and ribbon structures on the center Let C be a finite tensor category over an algebraically closed field k. The purpose of this section is to review sufficient conditions for the monoidal center ZpCq to be a modular tensor category. First, we recall the notion of a distinguished invertible object and the Radford isomorphism of C in Section 3.1. This allows us to recall, in Section 3.2, Shimizu’s necessary and sufficient conditions for ZpCq to be ribbon, generalizing a result of Radford–Kauffman in the case when C “ H-modpvectkq for H a finite-dimensional Hopf algebra. In Section 3.3, we recall the concept of a spherical category introduced in the work of Douglas–Schommer-Pries–Snyder [DSPS18], expanding the semisimple notion in [BW99] to the non-semisimple setting; it is then applied to describe when ZpCq is modular.

3.1. The distinguished invertible object D and the Radford isomorphism ξD. For details, see [EGNO15, Sections 7.18–7.19 and 8.10], [Rad12, Section 10.5], and references within. Consider C as a C ⊠ Cbop-module category. In this case, the canonical algebra is defined as bop Acan :“ Homp1, 1q P AlgpC ⊠ C q. For example, if H is a Hopf algebra over k, then the canonical ˚ bop algebra in C :“ H-modpvectkq is H P AlgpC ⊠ C q viewed as an H-bimodule over k with left bop and right H-actions given by translation. The category HopfBimodpCq :“ mod-AcanpC ⊠ C q of bop right Acan-modules in C ⊠ C is called the category of Hopf bimodules in C. Both Acan and its ˚ dual object Acan belong to HopfBimodpCq. Moreover, HopfBimodpCq is a tensor subcategory of bop pC ⊠ C , d, Acanq where bop bop bop bop bop d :“ ρpIdC ˆ F q ⊠ IdCbop : pC ⊠ C q ˆ pC ⊠ C q – pC ˆ pC ⊠ Cqq ⊠ C ÝÑ C ⊠ C , bop ˚ for F : C ⊠C Ñ vectk, pX,Y q ÞÑ HomC p Y, Xq and ρ is the natural action of vectk on C. Continu- ˚ ing the example above, for C :“ H-modpvectkq with H P HopfAlgpvectkq, and Acan “ H , we get that HopfBimodpCq is the usual category of Hopf bimodules over H. Moreover, for M,N P HopfBimodpCq, ˚ ˚ ˚ ˚ we obtain that M d N “ pM bH N q , for pq denoting the k-linear dual here. By [ENO04, Theorem 3.3] and [DSPS18, Theorem 3.3.4], there exists a invertible object D P C ⊠ 1 ˚ so that pD qd Acan – Acan as objects in HopfBimodpCq. This isomorphism is unique up to a scalar, and D is indeed an invertible object of C. We call D the distinguished invertible object of C. We also get a canonical natural tensor isomorphism „ 4˚ ξDpXq: D b X Ñ X b D, defined as follows. Let F, G: C Ñ C be two tensor functors, and consider the category ZpF, Gq with objects: „ ObpZpF, Gqq “ tpV,σV q | V P C, σV p´q: V b F p´q Ñ Gp´q b V a b-compatible natural isom.u, CONSTRUCTINGNON-SEMISIMPLEMODULARCATEGORIES 11

1 where the compatibility conditions are [Shi18, (3.1),(3.2)]. Two objects pV,σV q and pV ,σV 1 q of „ 1 ZpF, Gq are equivalent if there is an isomorphism f : V Ñ V so that σV 1 pXqpf bIdF pXqq “ pIdGpXq b fqσV pXq for all X P C. This category is not always monoidal, but it is always a finite abelian category [Shi18, Theorem 3.4]. We also have that ZpIdC , IdC q is the monoidal center ZpCq. By [Shi18, Lemma 3.3, (4.3)], we get equivalences

4˚ „ ˚˚ „ ˚˚ ZpIdC , p´qC q ÝÑ Acan-modpCq ÝÑ Acan-HopfBimodpCq. The first equivalence is an isomorphism, and the second equivalence is induced by C Ñ„ HopfBimodpCq ⊠ 1 ˚ ˚˚ given by Y ÞÑ pY qd Acan. Now the object Acan in Acan-HopfBimod(C) corresponds to pair 4˚ pD,ξDq in ZpIdC , p´qC q. Here, ξD is called the Radford isomorphism of C.

Now consider the case C “ H-modpvectkq for a Hopf algebra H over k, and consider the distin- guished grouplike elements of H and H˚ defined as follows (see [KR93, Section 1] or [Rad12, Section 10.5]). In this case, D is a one-dimensional module, and so the action is given through an invertible ˚ ´1 character αH P H , i.e. h ¨ d “ αH phqd for any d P D. By virtue of D being the distinguished invertible object in C,

˚ (3.1) αH P GpH q is uniquely characterized by αH phqΛ “ Λh, for all h P H, for a choice of non-zero left integral Λ for H. The Radford isomorphism is now given by the action of an element

˚ (3.2) gH P GpHq, which is uniquely characterized by pλ “ evpp b gH qλ, for all p P H , where λ is a non-zero right integral of H˚. Explicitly, if D “ kv, then for any X P C and x P X we 4 get ξDpXqpv b xq“ gH ¨ x b v. Now, Radford’s S -formula [Rad76],

4 ´1 ´1 S phq“ αH php1qq gH hp2q gH αH php3qq, 4˚ implies that pD,ξDq defines an object in ZpIdC , p´q q. Recall that a finite tensor category C is unimodular if D “ 1 [EGNO15, Section 6.5]. When C is a factorizable finite tensor category, then C is unimodular [EGNO15, Proposition 8.10.10].

3.2. Ribbon structures on the center. In this section, we recall results of [Shi18] and [KR93] on the existence of ribbon structures on the center ZpCq of a finite tensor category, using the pair pD,ξDq defined in the previous section.

Definition 3.3 (SqrtC pD,ξDq). Let C be a finite tensor category and recall pD,ξDq from Sec- tion 3.1. We define SqrtC pD,ξDq to be the set of equivalence classes of invertible objects pV,σV q „ in ZpIdC , p´q˚˚q such that there exists an isomorphism ν : V ˚˚ b V Ñ D such that the following diagram commutes:

˚˚ Id ˚˚ bσV pXq σV pXq bIdV V ˚˚ b V b X V / V ˚˚ b X˚˚ b V / X4˚ b V ˚˚ b V

(3.4) Id Id νb X X4˚ bν   ξDpXq D b X / X4˚ b D. 12 ROBERT LAUGWITZ AND CHELSEA WALTON

Theorem 3.5 ([Shi18, Sections 5.2, 5.4, 5.5]). The set of ribbon structures on ZpCq is in bijection with the set SqrtC pD,ξDq. In particular, if we take pV, σV q P SqrtC pD,ξDq, then the corresponding ribbon structure on ZpCq is given by θ “ φ´1j, where φ is the Drinfeld isomorphism of ZpCq from (2.6) and j is a pivotal structure on ZpCq given by

´1 „ ˚˚ jX :“ pIdX˚˚ b coevV qpσV pXqb IdV ˚ qpcX,V b IdV ˚ qpIdX b coevV q: X Ñ X , for X P C. 

In the case when C “ H-modpvectkq, Shimizu’s theorem specializes to the following classical result of Kauffman–Radford.

˚ Theorem 3.6 ([KR93, Theorem 3]). Let gH P H and αH P H be the distinguished grouplike elements defined in (3.1), (3.2). Then there is a bijection between the sets

˚ 2 2 pζ, aq P GpH qˆ GpHq ζ “ αH , a “ gH , satisfying (3.7) , where 2 ´1 ˇ ´1 ( (3.7) S phq“ ζ pˇhp1qqahp2qa ζphp3qq, for all h P H, and the set of ribbon elements of the Drinfeld double, DrinpHq, cf. (2.8). The bijection is given by sending a pair pζ, aq to SpRp2qqRp1qpζ´1ba´1q, for R and S the R-matrix and antipode of DrinpHq, respectively. 

The precise connection between the above results of Kauffman–Radford and Shimizu is given by the following proposition.

Proposition 3.8. Let H be a finite-dimensional Hopf algebra and C “ H-mod. Then there is a bijection between the set of pairs pζ, aq of Theorem 3.6 and the set SqrtC pD,ξDq of Definition 3.3.

˚˚ Proof. Given a pair pζ, aq as in Theorem 3.6, we define pV,σV q P ZpId, p´q q of SqrtC pD,ξDq as follows. First, V is the one-dimensional H-module with action h ¨ v “ ζ´1phqv for any v P V, h P H. ˚˚ Second, the isomorphism σV pXq: V b X Ñ X b V is defined by σX pv b xq “ ax b v for all v P V,x P X. This isomorphism defines an element in SqrtC pD,ξDq provided that pζ, aq satisfy the conditions of Theorem 3.6. In particular, (3.7) implies that σV pXq is a morphism of H-modules. Conversely, assume given a pair pV,σV q P SqrtC pD,ξDq. Then V is an invertible H-module and thus is 1-dimensional. Fix a generator v P V . Then we obtain ζ such that h ¨ v “ ζ´1phqv. The ˚˚ ´2 ´1 2 isomorphism ν : V b V Ñ D of H-modules implies that ζ “ αH and hence ζ “ αH . We 2 obtain an element a P GpHq so that a “ gH , satisfying, (3.7) as follows. Recall that there is an isomorphism of Hopf algebras H – EndpF q, where F : C Ñ vectk is the forgetful functor, for details, see e.g. [EGNO15, Sections 5.2–5.3]. Here, h P H gets sent to thX : F pXq Ñ F pXq,x ÞÑ h ¨ xuXPObpCq. Further, for the 1-dimensional H-module V fixed above, there are isomorphisms of 1 „ 2 „ k-vector spaces fX : F pV qb F pXq Ñ F pXq, v b x ÞÑ x and fX : F pXq Ñ F pXqb F pV q,x ÞÑ x b v, natural in X. So by identifying the k-vector spaces F pXq and F pX˚˚q, we obtain that the natural „ 2 1 isomorphism σV pXq: F pV qb F pXq Ñ F pXqb F pV q is of the form fX ˝ aX ˝ fX and must be given by v b x ÞÑ pa ¨ xqb v for some a P H. The assumption that σV defines a natural isomorphism V b p´q Ñ„ p´q˚˚ b V of H-modules implies condition (3.7). The diagram in (3.4) implies that 2 a “ gH .  CONSTRUCTINGNON-SEMISIMPLEMODULARCATEGORIES 13

3.3. Non-semisimple spherical categories. Using the distinguished invertible object D defined in Section 3.1, we obtain a notion of sphericality for non-semisimple finite tensor categories.

Definition 3.9 ([DSPS18, Definition 3.5.2]). A pivotal finite tensor category pC, b, 1, jq is spherical if there is an isomorphism ν : 1 Ñ„ D so that the following diagram commutes

˚˚ j jX X X / X4˚

(3.10) Id Id νb X X4˚ bν   ξDpXq D b X / X4˚ b D.

In fact, if C is semisimple; then C is spherical precisely when C is trace-spherical; see [DSPS18, Proposition 3.5.4].

Remark 3.11. On the one hand, a spherical category in the sense above gives a special case of a tensor category C satisfying the assumption that SqrtC pD,ξDq from Definition 3.3 is non-empty; namely, p1, jq P SqrtC pD,ξDq. On the other hand, Example 5.2 later illustrates that there are categories C satisfying SqrtC pD,ξDq‰ ∅ that do not have a spherical structure.

Proposition 3.12 (SPivpHq). Take C “ H-modpvectkq and recall (3.1), (3.2). Then C is spherical in the sense of Definition 3.9 if and only if αH “ ε and

2 2 ´1 SPivpHq :“ a P GpHq | a “ gH , S phq“ aha , for all h P H ‰ ∅. ( In this case, there is a bijection between pivotal structures j on C such that pC, jq is spherical and the set SPivpHq.

Proof. First assume that C “ H-modpvectkq is spherical. Then, by definition, D – 1, which implies that αH “ ε. By Remark 3.11, p1, jq P SqrtC pD,ξDq. Using Proposition 3.8, this element of 2 SqrtC pD,ξDq corresponds to a pair pζ, aq satisfying (3.7), with ζ “ ε, such that a “ gH . Thus, a P SPivpHq. From Proposition 3.8 it further follows that there is a bijection between the subset of SqrtC pD,ξDq of pairs pV,σV q such that V – 1 and pairs pε, aq satisfying the conditions of 2 Theorem 3.6 (i.e a “ gH and (3.7), or equivalently, a P SPivpHq). Conversely, assume αH “ ε and a P SPivpHq‰ ∅. Again under the bijection of Proposition 3.8, the pair pε, aq corresponds an element p1,σ1q P SqrtC pD,ξDq. In particular, p1,σ1q is an element of ZpIdC , p´q˚˚q which implies, using the convention 1 b X “ X “ X b 1, that j :“ σ1 is a pivotal structure for C, which, by construction, satisfies (3.10). Thus, C is spherical. 

Examples of spherical categories obtained from Nichols algebras can be found later in the text, see Remark 5.16(3) and Example 5.18. Next, we show that a source of non-semisimple spherical categories is given by unimodular ribbon categories, cf. [EGNO15, Proposition 8.10.12] in the semisimple case. Recall that in the semisimple case, every finite tensor category is unimodular [EGNO15, Remark 6.5.9].

Proposition 3.13. Any unimodular finite ribbon category is spherical in the sense of Definition 3.9. 14 ROBERT LAUGWITZ AND CHELSEA WALTON

Proof. Assume C is a ribbon category with braiding c and twist θ. Then C is a pivotal category via the pivotal structure j of (2.7). Consider the following computation:

˚ ˚˚ ˚ φX˚ jX jX “ φX˚ jX˚˚ jX ˚ “ φX˚ φX˚˚ θX˚˚ φX θX ˚ “ φX˚ φX˚˚ pIdX˚˚ b evX qpcX˚,X˚˚ pθX˚ b θX˚˚ qcoevX˚ b IdX q ˚ ´1 “ φX˚ φX˚˚ pIdX˚˚ b evX qpcX˚˚,X˚ pθX˚bX˚˚ qcoevX˚ b IdX q ˚ ´1 “ φX˚ φX˚˚ pIdX˚˚ b evX qpcX˚˚,X˚ b IdX q

“ φX .

˚ ˚ Here, the first equation uses that jX˚ “ jX . The second equation uses (2.7) and that θX˚ “ θX . The third equality uses (2.6) and the naturality of θ. The fourth equation follows from θXbY “ pθX b θY q cX,Y cY,X “ cY,X cX,Y pθX b θY q. The next equation holds by the naturality of θ and the fact that θ1 “ Id1. The last equality then follows a sequence of arguments using the naturality ˚˚ ˚ ´1 of the braiding and rigidity axioms. So, jX jX “ pφX˚ q φX . Now assume that C is unimodular so that D “ 1. Using [Shi18, Theorem A.6], cf. [EGNO15, Theorem 8.10.7], we find that ˚ ´1 ξDpXq “ pφX˚ q φX . Thus, using η “ Id: 1 Ñ D, this shows that j satisfies the conditions of Definition 3.9. Thus, C is spherical. 

Finally, recent results of Shimizu provide, in the non-semisimple framework, a sufficient condition for the monoidal center ZpCq to be modular.

Theorem 3.14 ([Shi18, Theorem 5.10]). If C is a tensor category with SqrtC pD,ξDq‰ ∅, then its center ZpCq is modular in the sense of Definition 2.11. 

By Remark 3.11, one obtains the following consequence generalizing M¨uger’s result [M¨ug03, Theorem 2], see also [TV17, Theorem 9.11], to the non-semisimple case.

Corollary 3.15 ([Shi18, Theorem 5.11]). If C is spherical in the sense of Definition 3.9, then its center ZpCq is modular in the sense of Definition 2.11. 

4. Modularity of Muger¨ centralizers and relative monoidal centers This section contains the main categorical results of this paper. We first use the double centralizer theorem of [Shi19] to prove that M¨uger centralizers of non-degenerate topologizing subcategories in a modular category are again modular [Section 4.1]. Then we recall the construction of the relative center ZBpCq [Section 4.2] and conclude, as a main application, that it produces modular categories under conditions on C identified in [Shi18] and assuming that B is non-degenerate [Section 4.3]. We also produce an analogue of M¨uger’s decomposition theorem of modular categories in the non- semisimple setting [Section 4.4]. CONSTRUCTINGNON-SEMISIMPLEMODULARCATEGORIES 15

4.1. Modularity of M¨uger centralizers. In the following we apply the double centralizer the- orem of Shimizu [Shi19, Theorem 4.9] (which is a non-semisimple version of [M¨ug03b, Theorem 3.2(i)]) to obtain a generalization of the result of M¨uger [M¨ug03b, Corollary 3.5] that centralizers of non-degenerate subcategories in modular categories are again modular in the non-semisimple setting. For this, we require the following notion of centralizer.

Let S be a subset of objects of a braided category C, the M¨uger centralizer CC pSq [M¨ug03b, Definition 2.6] of S in C is defined as the full subcategory of C with objects

(4.1) ObpCC pSqq :“ tX P C | cY,X cX,Y “ IdXbY for all Y P Su.

Note that CC pSq is a topologizing monoidal subcategory of C and, thus, braided. For a single object X in C, we denote CC ptXuq “ CC pXq. If C is rigid, then CC pSq is a rigid monoidal subcategory of C [M¨ug03b, Lemma 2.8]. The following result is straight-forward.

Lemma 4.2. If C is a (finite) tensor category and S a subset of its objects, then CC pSq is a (finite) tensor category. 

The result below is the main method of this paper used to construct modular tensor categories.

Theorem 4.3. Let D be a modular category in the sense of Definition 2.11, let E be a topologizing braided tensor subcategory of D, and consider the M¨uger centralizer CDpEq. Then,

1 1 CDpEq » E .

As a consequence, CDpEq is modular if and only if E is modular.

1 Proof. First, let V be an object in E . Then, for any object W in E, the equation IdV bW “ cW,V cV,W holds in D using that E is a full braided subcategory of D. By definition, this shows that V is an object in CDpEq. Now let X be an object in CDpEq. Again, by definition and since V P E, we get that V centralizes X. Hence, V is contained in the M¨uger center CDpEq1. Conversely, let X be an object in CDpEq1. Then, using CDpEq Ď D, we have that X is in the M¨uger centralizer CDpCDpEqq. Using the double centralizer theorem [Shi19, Theorem 4.9], it follows that CDpCDpEqq equals E. Note that this result uses that E is a topologizing subcategory of D. Hence, X is an object of E. But as X was assumed to be an object of CDpEq it centralizes all objects of E and is thus isomorphic to an object in E 1. Therefore, CDpEq1 » E 1, as desired. Hence, CDpEq is non-degenerate as in Definition 2.10 if and only E is. Since both CDpEq and E are ribbon subcategories of D [Lemma 2.9], the consequence holds. 

If E is not a topologizing subcategory that we can replace E by its subquotient completion, which is also a braided tensor subcategory of D, in the statement of the theorem above. Note that if D is semisimple, then E is a topologizing subcategory provided that it is a full subcategory closed under direct summands. (This follows as the simple objects of E are also simple in D and cannot have any non-trivial subquotients.)

4.2. B-central monoidal categories and relative monoidal centers. Let B :“ pB, bB, 1B, ψq be an abelian braided monoidal category throughout this section. Also, recall the braided monoidal B B ´1 „ category :“ p , ψY,X : X b Y Ñ Y b Xq. 16 ROBERT LAUGWITZ AND CHELSEA WALTON

Definition 4.4. A monoidal category C is B-central if there exists a faithful braided monoidal functor G: B Ñ ZpCq. In this case, we refer to the functor G as B-central as well. Likewise, if B is a braided (finite) tensor category, then we say that a (finite) tensor category C is B-central if there exists a faithful braided tensor functor G: B Ñ ZpCq. Remark 4.5. We compare our notion of a B-central functor with similar notions in the literature. (1) Denote by F : ZpCq Ñ C the forgetful functor. We have that for a B-central functor G, the functor T :“ F ˝ G: B Ñ C is central in the sense of [DNO13, Definition 2.3] and, in addition, faithful. Later in [DNO13] only central functors such that T is fully faithful are considered. While faithfulness of G is equivalent to faithfulness of T we do not require that T is full. (2) Recall from [Lau20, Section 3.3] that a monoidal category C is B-augmented if it comes equipped with monoidal functors F 1 : C Ñ B and T 1 : B Ñ C and natural isomorphisms 1 1 „ 1 „ op 1 1 τ : F T Ñ IdB and σ : bC pIdC ⊠ T q ÑbC pIdC ⊠ T q such that σ descends to ψ under F , τ and σ are coherent with the structure of C and B. Soa B-augmented monoidal category C is B-central. In fact, we may define a functor of braided monoidal categories G: B Ñ ZpCq, by B ÞÑ pT 1pBq,σ´1q and by T 1 on morphism spaces. Since T 1 has a right inverse, it is faithful, and thus G is faithful. (3) Note that, in the semisimple case, if B is non-degenerate, then G is fully faithful; see [DMNO13, Corollary 3.26]. Example 4.6. Given H a Hopf algebra in a braided monoidal category (respectively, braided (finite) tensor category) B, we have that C “ H-modpBq is a B-central monoidal category (respectively, B- central (finite) tensor category) [Lau20, Example 3.17]. Define a braided monoidal functor G: B Ñ Z C B triv ´1 triv p q by sending V P to ppV, aV q, ψ´,V q, where aV :“ ε b IdV : H b V Ñ V is the trivial H-action on V and ψ is the braiding of B. The two conditions of the action being trivial, and the half-braiding equaling ψ´1, are stable under taking subquotients in ZpCq. Hence, the image of B in ZpCq is a topologizing subcategory. Definition 4.7. Given a B-central monoidal category C, we define the relative monoidal center ZBpCq to be the braided monoidal full subcategory consisting of objects pV, cq of ZpCq, where V „ is an object of C, and the half-braiding c :“ cV,´ : V b IdC Ñ IdC b V is a natural isomorphism satisfying the two conditions below:

(i) [tensor product compatibility] cV,XbY “ pIdX b cV,Y qpcV,X b IdY q, for X,Y P C.

(ii) [compatibility with B-central structure] cGpBq,V ˝ cV,GpBq “ IdV bGpBq, for any B P B. That is, ZBpCq is the full subcategory of ZpCq of all objects that centralize GpBq for any object B of B.

Remark 4.8. It is clear, by definition, that ZBpCq is equal to the M¨uger centralizer CZpCqpGpBqq. Hence, ZBpCq is a topologizing braided monoidal subcategory of ZpCq. Proposition 4.9. Take B a braided (finite) tensor category, and C a B-central (finite) tensor category (with B-central functor G: B Ñ ZpCq). Then, ZBpCq is a braided (finite) tensor category. Proof. First, recall that ZpCq is a braided finite tensor category by Proposition 2.2. Next, Re- mark 4.8 implies that the braiding in ZBpCq is the restriction of the braiding in ZpCq. Finally, with CONSTRUCTINGNON-SEMISIMPLEMODULARCATEGORIES 17

Lemma 4.2, the full braided subcategory ZBpCq “ CZpCqpGpBqq of ZpCq is a tensor category, and it is finite provided that C is finite. 

Remark 4.10. An important invariant of a finite tensor category C is the Frobenius–Perron dimen- sion FPdimpCq defined in [EGNO15, Definition 6.1.7]. It follows directly from [Shi19, Theorem 4.9] and [EGNO15, Theorem 7.16.6] for C a B-central finite tensor category, the Frobenius–Perron dimension of the relative center is given by FPdimpCq2 FPdim ZBpCq “ . FPdimpBq ` ˘ Example 4.11. For any braided monoidal category B consider the functor B Ñ ZpBq of braided ´1 B B monoidal categories given by sending X to pX, ψ´,X q. This functor makes a -central monoidal category such that ZBpBq» B as braided monoidal categories.

Example 4.12. In the setup of Example 4.6, where B is rigid and C “ H-modpBq for H P HopfAlgpBq, we have an equivalence of braided monoidal categories

H ZBpCq» H YDpBq, see [Lau20, Proposition 3.36]. If B is a (finite) tensor category here, then so is ZBpCq.

Example 4.13. Continuing the example above, let B “ K-mod for a finite-dimensional quasi- triangular Hopf algebra K, and H a finite-dimensional Hopf algebra in B with dual H˚ (as in dually paired Hopf algebras [Lau19, Definition 3.1]), and

C “ H-modpK-modq» H ⋊ K-mod.

Then there is an equivalence of tensor categories

H ˚ ZBpCq» H YDpBq» DrinKpH,H q-mod.

˚ Here, DrinKpH,H q is a quasi-triangular Hopf algebra called the braided Drinfeld double of H. It is due to [Maj99] where it is referred to as the double bosonization. For details, including a ˚ presentation of DrinK pH,H q, see [Lau19, Section 3.2]. See Lemma 5.9 for a presentation in the case that H is a Nichols algebra of diagonal type. The case when K “ k is discussed at the end of Section 2.5.3.

4.3. Main application: Modularity of ZBpCq. In this part, we provide the main application of Theorem 4.3 to establish when a relative monoidal center is modular. This result provides sufficient conditions that ZBpCq is a modular category.

Theorem 4.14. Let B be a non-degenerate braided finite tensor category, and C a B-central finite tensor category so that the set SqrtC pD,ξDq from Definition 3.3 is non-empty. Assume that the full image GpBq in ZpCq is a topologizing subcategory. Then the relative monoidal center ZBpCq is a modular tensor category.

Here, the braiding of ZBpCq is restricted from that of ZpCq, see Proposition 4.9, and the ribbon structure is restricted to ZBpCq from that of ZpCq by Lemma 2.9. 18 ROBERT LAUGWITZ AND CHELSEA WALTON

Proof of Theorem 4.14. We have that ZpCq is modular by Theorem 3.14. By assumption, the full image GpBq is a topologizing subcategory of ZpCq, and since G: B Ñ ZpCq is faithful, GpBq is non- degenerate. Now, apply Theorem 4.3 with D “ ZpCq and E “ GpBq, together with Remark 4.8, to conclude that ZBpCq is modular, as desired.  Remark 4.15. The statement of Theorem 4.14 can be varied to requiring that the subquotient completion of the full image of G (with braiding obtained from being a tensor subcategory of ZpCq) is non-degenerate instead of requiring that B is non-degenerate and GpBq topologizing.

H In the setting of Example 4.12, Shimizu achieved Theorem 4.14 for ZBpCq» H YDpBq in [Shi19b, Theorem 4.2] using [Shi19, Theorem 6.2]. Next, by Theorem 3.14 we obtain the following result as a special case. Corollary 4.16. Let B be a non-degenerate braided finite tensor category, and C a B-central finite tensor category which is spherical in the sense of Definition 3.9 and such that the full image GpBq in ZpCq is a topologizing subcategory. Then the relative monoidal center ZBpCq is modular. Proof. This follows directly from Theorem 4.14 using Remark 3.11.  Observe that this result is a relative generalization of Corollary 3.15 above due to Shimizu. 4.4. M¨uger’s decomposition theorem in the non-semisimple setting. In this section, we establish a generalization of M¨uger’s decomposition theorem of modular fusion categories [M¨ug03b, Theorem 4.5] to the non-semisimple setting [Corollary 4.20]. We begin with a non-semisimple generalization of [M¨ug03b, Theorem 4.2]. Theorem 4.17. Let D be a modular tensor category, with a topologizing non-degenerate braided tensor subcategory E. Then there is an equivalence of ribbon categories:

D » E ⊠ CDpEq. Here, E is modular [Remark 2.12]; the results in [M¨ug03b] have E being modular as a hypothesis.

Proof of Theorem 4.17. As in the discussion before [Shi19, Lemma 4.8], let D1 and D2 be topolo- D gizing subcategories of D, and let T : D1 ⊠ D2 Ñ D be the functor induced by b . Set D1 _ D2 to be the closure under subquotients of the image of T . We then get that D1 _ D2 and D1 X D2 are topologizing full subcategories of D. Applying this to D1 “ E and D2 “ CDpEq we see that 1 E X CDpEq “ tV P E | cW,V cV,W “ IdV bW @W P Eu“ E » vectk. Next, E ⊠ CDpEq» E _ CDpEq as ribbon tensor categories via the functor T above. Indeed we see by construction that T is essentially surjective. Applying [Shi19, Lemma 4.8] with E X CDpEq» vectk we get that

FPdimpE _ CDpEqq = FPdimpEq FPdimpCDpEqq = FPdimpE ⊠ CDpEqq.

So by [EGNO15, Proposition 6.3.4], T is an equivalence of categories. Moreover, E and CDpEq centralize each other by definition. So, as in the proof of [M¨ug03, Proposition 7.7], T is a functor of braided tensor categories such that T pθV ⊠ θW q“ θV bW , for all V P E, W P CDpEq. Thus, T is an equivalence of ribbon tensor categories as the braiding and twist are preserved. CONSTRUCTINGNON-SEMISIMPLEMODULARCATEGORIES 19

Finally, we get the desired result by the computation below, which follows from the double centralizer theorem [Shi19, Theorem 4.9]:

E _ CDpEq“ CDrCDpE _ CDpEqqs “ CDrCDpEqX CDpCDpEqqs

“ CDrCDpEqX Es» CDpvectkq“ D. 

Example 4.18. Let B be a non-degenerate braided finite tensor category, and let C be a B-central finite tensor category, with B-central functor G: B Ñ ZpCq. Assume that GpBq is a topologizing subcategory of ZpCq and that SqrtC pD,ξDq‰ ∅. (1) Then, by the Theorems 4.14 and 4.17, we have a decomposition of modular tensor categories:

ZpCq » B ⊠ ZBpCq. (2) If, further, B “ K-mod and C “ H-modpK-modq, for a quasi-triangular Hopf algebra K, and for a finite-dimensional Hopf algebra H in B, then by Example 4.13, we have a decomposition of modular tensor categories: ˚ DrinpH ⋊ Kq-mod » K-mod ⊠ DrinK pH,H q-mod.

In comparison with [M¨ug03b, Definition 4.4], consider the following terminology.

Definition 4.19. A modular tensor category C is prime if every topologizing non-degenerate braided tensor subcategory is equivalent to either C or vectk.

As a consequence of Theorem 4.17, we immediately obtain the result below; cf., [M¨ug03b, Theo- rem 4.5].

Corollary 4.20. Every modular tensor category is equivalent to a finite Deligne tensor product of prime modular categories. 

Question 4.21. Continuing Example 4.18(2), when is the (not necessarily semisimple) modular ˚ category DrinK pH,H q-mod prime? In Example 5.3 below, we recall that the (non-semisimple, factorizable, ribbon) small quantum ˚ group uqpsl2q arises as a braided Drinfeld double DrinK pH,H q. It is an interesting question to determine the primality of its module category, and as well as of the module categories of other examples of non-semisimple braided Drinfeld doubles in the next section. In the semisimple case, M¨uger offers examples of prime and non-prime module categories over Drinfeld doubles of groups [M¨ug03b, Theorem 4.7, Table 1].

5. Examples of modular categories In this part, we provide several examples of modular tensor categories using the relative center construction [Theorem 4.14]. In some cases, we also illustrate our decomposition result Theo- rem 4.17 above. We start in Section 5.1 by discussing relative centers over vectk, monoidal centers of modules over Taft algebras, and their relation to uqpsl2q-mod. Next, we provide preliminary information about braided doubles of Nichols algebras of diagonal type in Section 5.2. We study the modularity of braided doubles of such Nichols algebras in Section 5.3; the main result is Propo- sition 5.15 there. Finally, in Section 5.4 we apply this result to module categories of small quantum 20 ROBERT LAUGWITZ AND CHELSEA WALTON groups (of Cartan type) and also to module categories of a braided Drinfeld double of Nichols alge- bras not of Cartan type. Throughout this section, we additionally assume that k has characteristic zero.

5.1. First examples. Here, we include some first examples of non-semisimple modular categories obtained from the general result of Theorem 4.14.

Example 5.1. Take B “ vectk, the category of finite-dimensional k-vector spaces with its usual symmetric structure. Let C be a finite tensor category over k (i.e., C is vectk-central) so that the set SqrtC pD,ξDq is non-empty. For instance, if C is unimodular finite ribbon category, then C is spherical [Proposition 3.13] and hence SqrtC pD,ξDq ‰ ∅ [Remark 3.11]. Then Theorem 4.14 specializes to the result that Zvectk pCq“ ZpCq is modular, recovering Theorem 3.14.

´2 Example 5.2 ((Drinfeld double of) the Taft algebra Tnpq q). Let n ě 3 be an integer, and let 2 n q be a primitive root of unity so that q has order n. Take K “ kZn, for Zn “ xg | g “ 1y, and B B 1 n´1 ´2ij i j set q “ K-mod. Here, q is braided using the R-matrix R “ n i,j“0 q g b g . Next, take the monoidal category ř n C :“ H-modpBqq, for H :“ krxs{px q P HopfAlgpBqq, ´2 with ∆pxq“ x b 1 ` 1 b x and εpxq“ 0. As in [LW20, Section 6], consider the Taft algebra Tnpq q, which is the k-Hopf algebra: ´2 n n ´2 T :“ Tnpq q“ kxg,xy{pg ´ 1, x , gx ´ q xgq, with ∆pgq“ g b g, ∆pxq“ g´1 b x ` x b 1, εpgq“ 1, εpxq“ 0, Spgq“ g´1, Spxq“´gx. Then, we get an equivalence of monoidal categories: ´2 C » Tnpq q-mod.

Computations as in [KR93, Proposition 7] show that if n is even, then SqrtC pD,ξDq “ ∅; see Proposition 3.8. If n “ 2m ´ 1 is odd, then the distinguished grouplike elements (see (3.1), (3.2)) ´2 m m are given by gT “ g and αT : T Ñ k with αT pgq “ q , αT pxq “ 0. Thus, a “ gT and ζ “ αT are the unique elements satisfying the equations of Theorem 3.6. Hence, using Proposition 3.8, the unique element pV,σV q of SqrtC pD,ξDq is given by the 1-dimensional T -module V “ kv, where 2m „ ˚˚ m g ¨ v “ q , x ¨ v “ 0, and σV pW q: V b W Ñ W b V , with σV pW qpv b wq “ pg ¨ wqb v, for W P ObC, w P W . Thus, SqrtC pD,ξDq‰ ∅ if and only if n is odd. In this case, by Theorem 3.14, we get that ZpCq is modular with a unique ribbon structure. We further have an equivalence of modular categories ´2 ZpCq» DrinpTnpq qq-mod, where modularity of the right-hand side is inherited from that on the left-hand side. We note that C is not a spherical category in the sense of Definition 3.9 since D ≇ 1, cf. [DSPS18, Section 3.5.2] for the case n “ 3. In particular, αT fails to equal ε as in Proposition 3.12.

Example 5.3 (The small quantum group uqpsl2q). For q as in Example 5.2, with n odd, consider the small quantum group uqpsl2q which is generated by k, e, f, subject to the relations k ´ k´1 kn “ 1, en “ f n “ 0, ke “ q2ek, kf “ q´2fk, ef ´ fe “ , q ´ q´1 CONSTRUCTINGNON-SEMISIMPLEMODULARCATEGORIES 21 with coproduct and counit determined on generators by ∆pkq“ k b k, ∆peq“ 1 b e ` e b k, ∆pfq“ k´1 b f ` f b 1, εpkq“ 1, εpeq“ εpfq“ 0. B C Z C For the categories q and as in Example 5.2, the relative center Bq p q is equivalent as a monoidal category to uqpsl2q-mod, see [LW20, Proposition 6.7(i)]. Thus, uqpsl2q-mod is a braided category. We have seen in Example 5.2 that since n is odd, SqrtC pD,ξDq contains a unique element. Moreover, in this case one checks that the underlying braided category Bq is non-degenerate using Z C [EGNO15, Exercise 8.6.4]. Thus, by Theorem 4.14, Bq p q» uqpsl2q-mod is modular. Continuing Example 4.18, we see that there is a decomposition of modular categories ´2 DrinpTnpq qq-mod » Bq ⊠ uqpsl2q-mod. A vast generation of this example, using braided Drinfeld doubles of Nichols algebras of diagonal type, will be given in the following sections. 5.2. Braided Drinfeld doubles of Nichols algebras of diagonal type. In this part, we discuss Nichols algebras of diagonal type, a large class of Hopf algebras in braided categories kG-comod, for G a finite abelian group. To start, consider the following notation that will be used throughout the rest of the section.

Notation 5.4 (G, gi, mi, Λ, ei, i, gi, δi, K, r, b, Bq, γi, γi, γi, γi). Fix the notation below. ‚ Let G “xg1,...,gny be a finite abelian group, where gi has order mi.

‚ Take Λ to denote the lattice Zm1 ˆ¨¨¨ˆ Zmn , and let ei be the i-th elementary vector. i1 in ‚ For i “ pi1,...,inq P Λ, write gi :“ g1 ...gn and use additive notation on indices i, so e.g. ´1 g´ei “ gi . ‚ Take K to be the group algebra kG. ˚ ˚ ‚ Denote the basis of K dual to tgiu by tδiu, so that the pairing of K and K is given by xδi, gjy“ δi,j.

‚ Let q “ pqijq P Matnpkq with qij ‰ 0, and let Bq be the braided category K-comodr with dual R-matrix r of K given by rpgi b gjq“ qji.

‚ Consider the symmetric bilinear form b on K given by bpgi, gjq :“ rpgi, gjqrpgj, giq. In particular, b is determined by bpgi, gjq“ qijqji. ˚ ‚ For i “ pi1,...,inq P Λ, take the grouplike elements of K : γi :“ j rpgj b giqδj and γi :“ i1 řin i1 in j rpgi b gjqδj. We write γi :“ γei and γi :“ γei . Then γi “ γi . . . γi and γi “ γi . . . γi . We recordř a fact about non-degeneracy that will be used several times later.

Lemma 5.5 ([EGNO15, Example 8.13.5], [DGNO10, Section 2.11]). The braided category Bq is non-degenerate if and only if the symmetric pairing b is non-degenerate.  Next, we recall the definition of a Nichols algebra of diagonal type from work of Andruskiewitsch– Schneider [AS02]. K Definition 5.6 (BpV q, IpV q). Retain the notation above. Let V be an object in KYD (with bn braiding c). Recall that the tensor algebra TpV q“ ně0 V is a natural Hopf algebra object in K KYD, such that all elements v P V are primitive, i.e.,À ∆pvq“ v b 1 ` 1 b v. 22 ROBERT LAUGWITZ AND CHELSEA WALTON

(1) The Nichols algebra BpV q is the quotient of TpV q be the unique largest homogeneously bn generated Hopf ideal IpV qĎ ną1 V . (2) We say that BpV q is of diagonalÀ type if there exists a basis x1,...,xn of V so that

cpxi b xjq“ qijxj b xi. There exists a complete classification of finite-dimensional Nichols algebras of diagonal type over a field k or characteristic zero [Hec09]. The Nichols algebras BpV q have a PBW basis [Kha99] and generalized root systems [Hec06]. For finite-dimensional Nichols algebras of diagonal type, relations for the ideal IpV q were found in [Ang13,Ang15] and are detailed in many examples in [AA17]. ˚ Lemma 5.7 (Bq, Bq). Consider the Yetter–Drinfeld module V over K with action gi ¨ xj “ qijxj and coaction δpxiq“ gi b xi. Then: K (1) The Nichols algebra, BpV q P HopfAlgpK YDq is of diagonal type, which we denote by Bq. ˚ (2) If Bq is finite-dimensional, then Bq and Bq are dually paired Hopf algebras in Bq. In ˚ ˚ particular, the pairing ev : Bq b Bq Ñ k is uniquely induced from the pairing of V and V . Proof. Part (1) follows from [AS02, Section 2]. K For part (2), consider the braided monoidal functor Φr : Bq Ñ K YD sending pV, δV q to pV, aV , δV q, p´1q p0q where aV pk b vq“ rpv b kqb v , for all k P K and v P V . Then the Yetter–Drinfeld module V is the image of the K-comodule pV, δq under Φr and Bq is a Hopf algebra in the image of Φr. Thus, Bq, forgetting the K-action, is a Hopf algebra in Bq. It is well-known that the duality pairing ev: V ˚ b V Ñ k extends to a unique non-degenerate ˚ K pairing ev : BpV qb BpV qÑ k of Hopf algebras in K YD, see e.g. [HS20, Corollary 7.2.8]. By the above observations, this is a non-degenerate pairing of Hopf algebras in Bq. 

˚ Having viewed Bq and Bq as braided Hopf algebras in Bq “ K-comodr, we are able to compute their braided Drinfeld double over the Hopf algebra K˚, cf. Example 4.13; see [Lau19, Section 3.2] for the presentation of general braided Drinfeld doubles used here. We fix the following notation.

Notation 5.8 (xi, yi). For V in Definition 5.6 and in Lemma 5.7 above, we fix dual bases x1,...,xn ˚ of V , and y1,...,yn of V , and denote the resulting generators of BpV q, respectively, of the dual Nichols algebra BpV ˚q by the same symbols. ˚ Proposition 5.9 (DrinK˚ pBq, Bqq). Retain the notation above and assume that the braided Hopf algebra Bq in K-comodr from Lemma 5.7 is finite-dimensional. Then the braided Drinfeld double ˚ DrinK˚ pBq, Bqq is a Hopf algebra generated as an algebra by elements tδiuiPΛ, txiui“1,...,n, and ˚ tyiui“1,...,n, subject to the relations IpV q and IpV q, along with ´1 δiδj “ δi,jδi, δixj “ xjδi´ej , δiyj “ yjδi`ej , yixj ´ qji xjyi “ p1 ´ γiγiqδi,j.

Here, it is understood that δi “ δj if i “ j P Λ. The coproduct and counit are determined by

∆pδiq“ δa b δb, ∆pxiq“ xi b 1 ` γi b xi, ∆pyiq“ yi b 1 ` γi b yi, a`ÿb“i εpδiq“ δi,0, εpxiq“ εpyiq“ 0. The antipode is determined by ´1 ´1 Spδiq“ δ´i, Spxiq“´γi xi, Spyiq“´γi yi. CONSTRUCTINGNON-SEMISIMPLEMODULARCATEGORIES 23

˚ The Hopf algebra DrinK˚ pBq, Bqq is quasi-triangular with R-matrix given by

RDrin “ δiyα b xαγi, ÿα ÿi ˚ where α indexes a basis txαu of Bq with dual basis tyαu of Bq with respect to the paring ev. Proof. First, note that for pK, rq coquasi-triangular, ppK˚qcop, r˚q is a quasi-triangular Hopf algebra, where pK˚qcop “ pK, m, u, ∆op,ε,S´1q is the co-opposite Hopf algebra with R-matrix given by the dual of r, i.e. ˚ R :“ r “ pr b IdK˚bK˚ qpIdK b coevK b IdK˚ qcoevK. The functor ˚ cop ˚ ˚ Φ: K-comodr ÝÑ pK q -modR, pV, δq ÞÝÑ pV, aV q, aV :“ pevK b IdV qpIdK˚ b δq, defines an equivalence of braided tensor categories. In the case K “ kG, pK˚qcop “ K˚ and, thus, ˚ ˚ Bq and Bq can be regarded as dually paired Hopf algebras in K -modR. The result now follows from specifying the presentation from [Lau19, Section 3.2] to the case ˚ ˚ ˚ ˚ ˚ ˚ DrinK˚ pBq, Bqq. For this, observe that R “ r for K is given by R “ i δi b γi P K b K and that the action and coaction of K˚ on V are given by ř

δi ¨ xj “ δi,ej xj, δpxj q“ γj b xj, γi ¨ xj “ qijxj, γi ¨ xj “ qjixj. 

1 ˚ Remark 5.10 (ki, ki, G ). Note that DrinK˚ pBq, Bqq is a Z-graded Hopf algebra where deg δi “ 0, for i P Λ, deg xi “ 1 and deg yi “ ´1, for i “ 1,...,n. It has a triangular decomposition on ˚ ˚ Bq b K b Bq. Modules over this Hopf algebra can be described as a relative monoidal center, cf. Example 4.13. For i P Λ, we denote ki :“ γiγi and ki :“ γiγi. When the braided category Bq is ˚ 1 1 non-degenerate [Lemma 5.5], K is isomorphic to the group algebra kG , where G “xk1,...,kny is ˚ 1 ˚ isomorphic to G. Thus, in this case, DrinK˚ pBq, Bqq has a triangular decomposition Bq bkG bBq. op We note neither r nor r are necessarily non-degenerate pairings, so xγ1, . . . , γny and xγ1,..., γny are, in general, proper subgroups of G1 (see, e.g., Example 5.18 below).

The next result, relating braided Drinfeld doubles and relative centers, will be of use later.

Proposition 5.11 ([Lau20, Section 4.2]). Retain Notation 5.4 and set C “ Bq-modpBqq. Then there exists an equivalence of braided monoidal categories „ ˚ Z C ˚ Bq p q Ñ DrinK pBq, Bqq-mod. 

5.3. Modularity of braided Drinfeld doubles of Nichols algebras of diagonal type. In this section, we present an application of Theorem 4.14 by providing sufficient conditions for categories ˚ of finite-dimensional modules over DrinK˚ pBq, Bqq, i.e. over braided Drinfeld doubles of finite- dimensional Nichols algebras of diagonal type, to be modular.

Notation 5.12 (ℓ, xℓ, iℓ). Continuing Notation 5.4 assume that the Nichols algebra Bq is finite- dimensional and let ℓ be the the top Z-degree of Bq. Note that pBqqℓ is one-dimensional [AS02, Lemma 1.12]. We choose a non-zero element xℓ in pBqqℓ and denote its G-degree by iℓ.

` Lemma 5.13 ([AA17, Section 2.12]). We have that i “ ` pm ´ 1qβ P Λ, where ∆ is the ℓ βP∆q β q set of positive roots of the Nichols algebra Bq and mβ is theř order of the root of unity rpgβ, gβq.  24 ROBERT LAUGWITZ AND CHELSEA WALTON

Lemma 5.14. Recall (3.1), (3.2), Notation 5.12, and the notation of Section 5.2. The distinguished ˚ ˚ grouplike element for H :“ Bq ⋊ K and for H , respectively, are

gH “ 1 b γiℓ , αH px b δiq“ εpxqδi,´iℓ .

Proof. We use techniques from [Bur08, Section 4] by first understanding integrals of H. These ˚ elements can be built from integrals of Bq and of K as follows. Take a left integral of Bq, i.e., an ˚ element x P Bq such that hx “ εphqx for any h P Bq. Then for any left integral k of K , we get ˚ that Λ :“ p1 b kqpx b 1q “ pkp1q ¨ xqb kp2q is a left integral of H “ Bq ⋊ K [Bur08, Section 4.6]. Since pBqq0 “ k1, it follows that 1 is the only grouplike element of Bq. By self-duality of Bq, we conclude that the distinguished grouplike elements of Bq and its dual are g “ 1 P Bq and ˚ α “ ε P Bq, respectively. Thus, Λ “ δ0xℓ is a left integral for H and we compute that

Λxj “ 0 “ εpxjq“ αH pxj b 1qΛ, Λδi “ δ0δi`iℓ xℓ “ δi,´iℓ Λ “ αH p1 b δiqΛ, verifying the claimed formula for αH on generators. ˚ ˚ ˚ ˚ To find gH we observe that the elements δi P H and xj P H satisfy the relation ˚ ˚ ˚ ˚ xj δi “ rpgi, gjqδi xj , @j “ 1,...,n, i P Λ.

˚ ˚ ˚ A right integral for H is given by λ “ xℓ i δi . Hence, we compute on generators ˚ ˚ ř˚ xj λ “ 0 “ εpxj qλ “ evpxj , 1 b γiℓ qλ, for all j “ 1,...,n, ˚ ˚ ˚ ˚ ´1 ˚ ˚ ˚ ˚ δj λ “ δj xℓ δi “ r pgj, g´iℓ qxℓ δj δi “ rpgj, giℓ qλ “ evpδj , 1 b γiℓ qλ, for all j P Λ. ÿi ÿi

This computation verifies the claimed formula for gH . 

See [AA17, Proposition 2.42] for similar computations for Bq ⋊kG. Next, we derive the following ˚ conditions for DrinK˚ pBq, Bqq-mod to be modular.

Proposition 5.15. Recall Notation 5.4 and 5.12, and Remark 5.10. The braided tensor categories

˚ ˚ Z B DrinK pBq, Bqq-mod » Bq pBq-modp qqq are modular when (i) the symmetric bilinear form b on K is non-degenerate, and 2 (ii) there exist j, a P Λ such that 2j “ iℓ, 2a “ iℓ, bpgi, gaq “ rpgi, giℓ q, and rpgj, giqbpgi, gaq “ ´1 qii for all i “ 1,...,n. Z B Proof. To show that Bq pBq-modp qqq is modular, it suffices to check that (a) the braided finite B tensor category q is non-degenerate and that (b) the set SqrtBq-modpBqqpD,ξDq is non-empty, by ˚ Theorem 4.14. Then, the equivalent category, DrinK˚ pBq, Bqq-mod [Proposition 5.11], is also modular. Now (a) follows from (i) using Lemma 5.5. ˚ Now we show that (ii) implies (b). Take H :“ Bq ⋊ K , a finite-dimensional Hopf algebra with H-mod » Bq-modpBqq. By (ii), we can define

a “ 1 b ka, ζpx b δiq“ εpxqδi,´j, CONSTRUCTINGNON-SEMISIMPLEMODULARCATEGORIES 25 and compute using Proposition 5.9 that

2 2 2 a “ ka “ bpgi, gaqbpgl, gaqδiδl “ bpgi, gaq δi “ rpgi, giℓ qδi “ γiℓ “ gH , i,ÿlPΛ iÿPΛ iÿPΛ 2 ζ pδiq “ pζ b ζqp∆pδiqq “ ζpδkqζpδlq“ δk,´jδl,´j “ δi,´iℓ “ αH pδiq, k`ÿl“i k`ÿl“i 2 ζ pxiq“ ζpxiqζp1q` ζpγiqζpxiq“ 0 “ εpxiq“ αH pxiq,

˚ for all i “ 1,...,n and i P Λ. Here, αH and gH are the distinguished grouplike elements of H and H, respectively, of Lemma 5.14. For these elements, again using Proposition 5.9, we see that

2 ´1 ´1 S pxiq“ γi xiγi “ qii xi, ´1 ´1 ´1 ´1 ζ ppxiqp1qqapxiqp2qa ζppxiqp3qq“ ζ pγiqaxia ζp1q“ rpgj, giqbpgi, gaqxi,

´1 ´1 for all i. Here, γi is from Notation 5.4 and ζ pδiq“ δi,j. Using that rpgj, giqbpgi, gaq“ qii from (ii), we conclude that condition (3.7) holds for h “ xi. This equation is evident for h P G since G is an abelian group and hence holds for all h P H using that S2 is an algebra morphism. Thus, applying Proposition 3.8 with the above elements a and ζ yields (b). 

Remark 5.16. (1) As a consequence of Radford’s S4-formula [Rad76] for the Hopf algebra ˚ H “ Bq ⋊ K , we obtain that the values q “ pqijq satisfy ´2 rpgiℓ , giqrpgi, giℓ q“ qii . (2) Similar conditions as in Proposition 5.15(ii) were already derived in [AA17, Proposition 2.42] to determine when DrinpBq ⋊kGq is a ribbon Hopf algebra.

(3) Using Proposition 3.12, we derive necessary and sufficient conditions for C “ Bq-modpBqq to be spherical. The monoidal category

˚ Bq-modpBqq» Bq ⋊ K -mod

is spherical if and only if iℓ “ 0 and there exist b, c P Λ such that for a :“ γbγc, 2 ´1 a “ 1, rpgi, gbqrpgc, giq“ qii for all i “ 1,...,n. In this case, SPivpHq is given by these elements a. See Example 5.18 for a class of examples of spherical categories obtained this way.

5.4. Small quantum groups and other examples. In this subsection, we include some spe- cific examples and demonstrate how Theorem 4.14 and Proposition 5.15 lead to examples of non- semisimple modular categories.

Example 5.17 (The small quantum group uqpgq). Take q a root of unity of odd order l ě 3 and let g be the semisimple Lie algebra of rank t, associated to the irreducible symmetrizable Cartan matrix t paijqi,j“1. We choose coprime integers di “ 1, 2, 3 so that pdiaijq is a symmetric matrix. Associated to this data, one defines a finite-dimensional Hopf algebra uqpgq, the small quantum group (or 1 Frobenius–Lusztig kernel) as, e.g., in [Ros93, Section 3.2]. The Hopf algebras uqpgq generated by

1 When g is of type G2, assume l is coprime to 3; di “ 3 only appears in this case. 26 ROBERT LAUGWITZ AND CHELSEA WALTON

˘1 ´1 group-like elements ki , pki, 1q-skew primitive elements ei, and p1, ki q-skew primitive elements fi for i “ 1,...t, subject to relations: l l l ki “ 1, ei “ 0, fi “ 0,

diaij ´diaij ´1 di ´di ´1 kiej “ q ejki, kifj “ q fjki, eifj ´ fjei “ δi,jpki ´ ki qpq ´ q q ,

1´aij 1´aij m 1 ´ aij 1´aij ´m m m 1 ´ aij 1´aij ´m m p´1q ei ejei “ 0, p´1q fi fjfi “ 0, ˆ m ˙ d ˆ m ˙ d mÿ“0 q i mÿ“0 q i ˆt for the abelian group K :“xk1,...,kty– Zl . d a The above datum also defines a Nichols algebra of diagonal type by setting qij :“ q i ij . The aij braiding given by q is of Cartan type, i.e. satisfies qijqji “ qii , for all i, j “ 1,...,t. Moreover, the associated Nichols algebra Bq is isomorphic to uqpn`q, the positive part of the small quantum ˚ group associated to g, and the braided Drinfeld double DrinK˚ pBq, Bqq is isomorphic to uqpgq, both via ´di di γi “ γi ÞÑ ki, xi ÞÑ ei, yi ÞÑ kifipq ´ q q.

See, e.g., [Lus10], [AS02, Theorem 4.3], and references therein, for the isomorphism of Bq and uqpn`q, along with [Som96, Section 5.10], [Maj99, Proposition 4.3], [Lau20, Theorem 4.9] for the isomorphisms of the braided Drinfeld doubles. ˚ We obtain that the category DrinK˚ pBq, Bqq-mod » uqpgq-mod is modular by applying Propo- sition 5.15 as follows. First, the pairing r : G ˆ G Ñ k obtained from q as in Notation 5.4 is non-degenerate using a computation as in [Ros93, proof of Proposition 3.5], assuming that the deter- ˚ minant of pdiaijq is coprime to l. This implies that G is isomorphic to the group xγ1, . . . , γryĎ kG . Further, r is symmetric and the associated bilinear form b is given as its square. Thus, as all qdiaij are primitive l-th roots of unity, with l odd, the same holds for q2diaij and b is also non-degenerate. Therefore, Proposition 5.15(i) holds. Moreover, the proof of [Bur08, Theorem 5.4] contains a compu- tation that shows that Proposition 5.15(ii) holds for this class of examples.2 Therefore, Proposition ˚ 5.15 implies that DrinK˚ pBq, Bqq-mod is a modular tensor category. Continuing Example 4.18, we have a decomposition of modular categories:

Drinpuqpb`qq-mod » Bq ⊠ uqpgq-mod, where uqpb`q is the positive Borel part of uqpgq generated by the ei and ki.

Finally, we produce an example of a relative monoidal center that gives a modular category that is not of the form uqpgq-mod. It consists of modules over a more general type of quantum group, namely, modules over the braided Drinfeld double of a Nichols algebra that is not of Cartan type.

Example 5.18. Let q P k be a primitive 2n-th root of unity, for n ě 1 an odd integer. We denote by G the abelian group xg1, g2y “ Z2n ˆ Z2n. Consider the Nichols algebra Bq of diagonal type determined by q “ pqijq, with

q11 “ q22 “´1, q12 “ 1, q21 “ q,

2 ´1 ´1 In fact, Burciu denotes δ “ ζ, h “ a,χipgq “ rpgi,gq and verifies the required equation δ pgiqχphq “ χipgiq t using the Lie theoretic computation that, writing the j-th positive root as βj “ s“1 cjsαs, we have j s aiscjs “ 2. ř ř ř CONSTRUCTINGNON-SEMISIMPLEMODULARCATEGORIES 27 as in Section 5.2. This Nichols algebra appears in the classification of [Hec09, Table 1, Row 2]. It a1 a2 a12 has by [Kha99] a PBW basis given by the set x1 x2 x12 0 ď a1, a2 ă 2, 0 ď a12 ă 2n , where x :“ x x ´ x x , and is thus 8n-dimensional. Note that Bˇ is generated by x ,x subject( to the 12 1 2 2 1 ˇ q 1 2 relations 2 2 n x1 “ 0, x2 “ 0, x12 “ 0, see [AA17, Section 5.1.11], and is one of the Nichols algebras of super type Ap1|1q. In this example, the symmetric bilinear form b from Notation 5.4 is given by bpgi, gj q“ qjiqij, so

c1 c2 c1 c2 c2 c1 c2 c1 c2 c1 bpg1, g1 g2 q“ bpg1, g1q bpg1, g2q “ q , bpg2, g1 g2 q“ bpg2, g1q bpg2, g2q “ q , for all c1, c2.

c1 c2 Hence, g1 g2 is in the radical of b if and only if c1, c2 “ 0 mod2n since q is a primitive 2n-th root of unity. Thus, b is non-degenerate and Proposition 5.15(i) holds by Lemma 5.5. ˚ The Hopf algebra DrinK˚ pBq, Bqq may be presented as the Hopf algebra generated by xi,yi, and ki :“ γiγi for i “ 1, 2, subject to relations, for i, j “ 1, 2, i ‰ j, ´1 kixi “ xiki, kiyi “ yiki, kixj “ qxjki, kiyj “ q yjki, xiyj ` yjxi “ δi,jp1 ´ kiq, 2 2 2n 2n 2n xi “ yi “ 0, ki “ 1, px1x2 ´ x2x1q “ py2y1 ´ y1y2q “ 0, n n ∆px1q“ x1 b 1 ` k2 b x1, ∆px2q“ x2 b 1 ` k1 k2 b x2, n n ∆py1q“ y1 b 1 ` k1k2 b y1, ∆py2q“ y2 b 1 ` k1 b y2. n n n n Here, we use that γ1 “ k2 , γ2 “ k1 k2, γ1 “ k1k2 , and γ2 “ k1 . Note that xγ1, γ2y and xγ1, γ2y are both proper subgroups of xk1, k2y. 2n´1 The top Z-degree element xiℓ is x1x2x12 and has G-degree iℓ “ p2n, 2nq“ 0 P Λ “ Z2n ˆ Z2n. There are four pairs j “ pj1, j2q, a “ pa1, a2q P Λ satisfying the conditions from Proposition 5.15(ii): (1) j “ p0, 0q, a “ pn,nq; (2) j “ pn, 0q, a “ pn, 0q; (3) j “ p0,nq, a “ p0, 0q; (4) j “ pn,nq, a “ p0,nq; a1 a2 It is clear that in all cases (1)–(4), 2j “ 0 “ iℓ and that ka “ k1 k2 squares to gH “ γ0 “ 1, so 2 that bpgi, gaq “ rpgi, giℓ q “ 1 for all i “ 1, 2. The remaining condition of Proposition 5.15(ii) is verified using explicit computation. In Case (1), for instance, we compute that 2n n 2n n ´1 rpgj, g1qbpg1, gaq“ rpgp0,0q, g1qbpg1, gpn,nqq“ q11 pq12q21q “ p´1q q “´1 “ q11 , using qn “´1. Similarly, 2n n 2n n ´1 rpgj, g1qbpg1, gaq“ rpgp0,0q, g2qbpg2, gpn,nqq“ q22 pq21q12q “ p´1q q “´1 “ q22 .

Thus, the set SqrtC pD,ξDq contains four distinct elements, which yields four different ribbon struc- ˚ tures on DrinK˚ pBq, Bqq-mod by the proof of Theorem 4.14 (using Theorem 3.5). In each case, this category is modular by Proposition 5.15.

Moreover, to study the sphericality of the category C :“ Bq-modpBqq, we apply Remark 5.16(3), and show that only Case (1) yields a spherical structure. For this, we set b “ p1, 0q, c “ p0, 1q, and n n 2 2n 2n ´1 get that a “ γbγc “ γ1γ2 “ k1 k2 . Then a “ k1 k2 “ 1 and the equations rpgi, gbqrpgc, giq“ qii , for i “ 1, 2 follow similarly to above, thus satisfying the conditions in Remark 5.16(3). Note that a here is the same as the one obtained in Case (1); thus, in this case, C is spherical in the sense of Definition 3.9. Finally, Cases (2)–(4) do not yield spherical structures on C. Indeed, by Proposition 3.12, having a P SPivpHq is equivalent to pζ, aq belonging to the set of Theorem 3.6 with ζ “ ε. The pairs pj, aq above correspond to pairs pζ, aq in Theorem 3.6, with a “ ka and ζ 28 ROBERT LAUGWITZ AND CHELSEA WALTON

obtained from j via ζpx b δiq “ εpxqδi,j. To get that ζ “ ε, we need that j “ 0 which only occurs in Case (1).

Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the referees for their detailed suggestions that greatly improved the exposition of this work. The authors also thank Iv´an Angiono, Alexei Davydov, J¨urgen Fuchs, and Christoph Schweigert for interesting exchanges related to this ongoing project, Kenichi Shimizu for helpful exchanges about his work [Shi18] discussed in Section 3.2. R. Laugwitz was partially supported by an AMS-Simons travel grant and a Nottingham Research Fellowship. C. Walton was partially supported by a research fellowship from the Alfred P. Sloan foundation, and by the US National Science Foundation grant #DMS-1903192. Part of the work for this project was carried out during a visit of R. L. to UIUC; the hospitality of the hosting institution is gratefully acknowledged.

References

[AA17] N. Andruskiewitsch and I. Angiono, On finite dimensional Nichols algebras of diagonal type, Bull. Math. Sci. 7 (2017), no. 3, 353–573. [Ang13] I. Angiono, On Nichols algebras of diagonal type, J. Reine Angew. Math. 683 (2013), 189–251. [Ang15] I. E. Angiono, A presentation by generators and relations of Nichols algebras of diagonal type and convex orders on root systems, J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 17 (2015), no. 10, 2643–2671. [AS02] N. Andruskiewitsch and H.-J. Schneider, Pointed Hopf algebras, New directions in Hopf algebras, 2002, pp. 1–68. [Bes97] Yu. N. Bespalov, Crossed modules and quantum groups in braided categories, Appl. Categ. Structures 5 (1997), no. 2, 155–204. [BK01] B. Bakalov and A. Kirillov Jr., Lectures on tensor categories and modular functors, University Lecture Series, vol. 21, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2001. [Bur08] S. Burciu, A class of Drinfeld doubles that are ribbon algebras, J. Algebra 320 (2008), no. 5, 2053–2078. [BW99] J. W. Barrett and B. W. Westbury, Spherical categories, Adv. Math. 143 (1999), no. 2, 357–375. [Del90] P. Deligne, Cat´egories tannakiennes, The Grothendieck Festschrift, Vol. II, 1990, pp. 111–195. [DGNO10] V. Drinfeld, S. Gelaki, D. Nikshych, and V. Ostrik, On braided fusion categories. I, Selecta Math. (N.S.) 16 (2010), no. 1, 1–119. [DMNO13] A. Davydov, M. M¨uger, D. Nikshych, and V. Ostrik, The Witt group of non-degenerate braided fusion categories, J. Reine Angew. Math. 677 (2013), 135–177. [DNO13] A. Davydov, D. Nikshych, and V. Ostrik, On the structure of the Witt group of braided fusion categories, Selecta Math. (N.S.) 19 (2013), no. 1, 237–269. [DRGG`19] M. De Renzi, A. M Gainutdinov, N. Geer, B. Patureau-Mirand, and I. Runkel, 3-dimensional TQFTs from non-semisimple modular categories, arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.02063v2 [math.GT] (2019). [DSPS18] C. L. Douglas, C. Schommer-Pries, and N. Snyder, Dualizable tensor categories, arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.7188v2 [math.QA] (2018). [EGNO15] P. Etingof, S. Gelaki, D. Nikshych, and V. Ostrik, Tensor categories, Mathematical Surveys and Mono- graphs, vol. 205, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2015. [ENO04] P. Etingof, D. Nikshych, and V. Ostrik, An analogue of Radford’s S4 formula for finite tensor categories, Int. Math. Res. Not. 54 (2004), 2915–2933. [FSS19] J. Fuchs, G. Schaumann, and C. Schweigert, A modular functor from state sums for finite tensor cate- gories and their bimodules, Arxiv preprint arXiv:1911.06214 [math.QA] (2019). [Gan05] T. Gannon, Modular data: the algebraic combinatorics of conformal field theory, J. Algebraic Combin. 22 (2005), no. 2, 211–250. CONSTRUCTINGNON-SEMISIMPLEMODULARCATEGORIES 29

[GLO18] A. M. Gainutdinov, S. Lentner, and T. Ohrmann, Modularization of small quantum groups, arXiv preprint arXiv:1809.02116v2 [math.QA] (2018). [Hec06] I. Heckenberger, The Weyl groupoid of a Nichols algebra of diagonal type, Invent. Math. 164 (2006), no. 1, 175–188. [Hec09] , Classification of arithmetic root systems, Adv. Math. 220 (2009), no. 1, 59–124. [Hec10] , Lusztig isomorphisms for Drinfel′d doubles of bosonizations of Nichols algebras of diagonal type, J. Algebra 323 (2010), no. 8, 2130–2182. [HLZ14] Y.-Z. Huang, J. Lepowsky, and L. Zhang, Logarithmic tensor category theory for generalized modules for a conformal vertex algebra, I: introduction and strongly graded algebras and their generalized modules, Conformal field theories and tensor categories, 2014, pp. 169–248. [HS20] I. Heckenberger and H.-J. Schneider, Hopf Algebras and Root Systems, Mathematical Surveys and Mono- graphs, vol. 247, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2020. [Hua05] Y.-Z. Huang, Vertex operator algebras, the Verlinde conjecture, and modular tensor categories, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 102 (2005), no. 15, 5352–5356. [Kha99] V. K. Kharchenko, A quantum analogue of the Poincar´e-Birkhoff-Witt theorem, Algebra Log. 38 (1999), no. 4, 476–507, 509. [KL01] T. Kerler and V. V. Lyubashenko, Non-semisimple topological quantum field theories for 3-manifolds with corners, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1765, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2001. [KLM01] Y. Kawahigashi, R. Longo, and M. M¨uger, Multi-interval subfactors and modularity of representations in conformal field theory, Comm. Math. Phys. 219 (2001), no. 3, 631–669. [KR93] L. H. Kauffman and D. E. Radford, A necessary and sufficient condition for a finite-dimensional Drinfel′d double to be a ribbon Hopf algebra, J. Algebra 159 (1993), no. 1, 98–114. [Lau19] R. Laugwitz, Comodule algebras and 2-cocycles over the (braided) Drinfeld double, Commun. Contemp. Math. 21 (2019), no. 4, 1850045, 46. [Lau20] , The relative monoidal center and tensor products of monoidal categories, Commun. Contemp. Math. 22 (2020), no. 8, 1950068, 53. [LMSS20] S. Lentner, S. N. Mierach, C. Schweigert, and Y. Sommerhaeuser, Hochschild cohomology, modular tensor categories, and mapping class groups, ArXiv preprint arXiv:2003.06527 [math.QA] (2020). [LO17] S. Lentner and T. Ohrmann, Factorizable R-matrices for small quantum groups, SIGMA Symmetry Integrability Geom. Methods Appl. 13 (2017), Paper No. 076, 25. [Lus10] G. Lusztig, Introduction to quantum groups, Modern Birkh¨auser Classics, Birkh¨auser/Springer, New York, 2010. Reprint of the 1994 edition. [LW20] R. Laugwitz and C. Walton, Braided commutative algebras over quantized enveloping algebras, Transfor- mation Groups (2020). [Lyu95] V. V. Lyubashenko, Invariants of 3-manifolds and projective representations of mapping class groups via quantum groups at roots of unity, Comm. Math. Phys. 172 (1995), no. 3, 467–516. [M¨ug03a] M. M¨uger, From subfactors to categories and topology. II. The quantum double of tensor categories and subfactors, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 180 (2003), no. 1-2, 159–219. [M¨ug03b] , On the structure of modular categories, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 87 (2003), no. 2, 291–308. [Maj00] S. Majid, Foundations of quantum group theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000. Paper- back Edition, originally published 1995.

[Maj99] , Double-bosonization of braided groups and the construction of Uqpgq, Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 125 (1999), no. 1, 151–192. [MS89] G. Moore and N. Seiberg, Classical and quantum conformal field theory, Comm. Math. Phys. 123 (1989), no. 2, 177–254. [Neg21] C. Negron, Log-Modular Quantum Groups at Even Roots of Unity and the Quantum Frobenius I, Comm. Math. Phys. 382 (2021), no. 2, 773–814. [Rad12] D. E. Radford, Hopf algebras, Series on Knots and Everything, vol. 49, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., Hackensack, NJ, 2012. [Rad76] , The order of the antipode of a finite dimensional Hopf algebra is finite, Amer. J. Math. 98 (1976), no. 2, 333–355. 30 ROBERT LAUGWITZ AND CHELSEA WALTON

[Ros93] M. Rosso, Quantum groups at a root of 1 and tangle invariants, 1993, pp. 3715–3726. Yang-Baxter equations in Paris (1992). [Ros95] A. L. Rosenberg, Noncommutative algebraic geometry and representations of quantized algebras, Math- ematics and its Applications, vol. 330, Kluwer Academic Publishers Group, Dordrecht, 1995. [RSW09] E. Rowell, R. Stong, and Z. Wang, On classification of modular tensor categories, Comm. Math. Phys. 292 (2009), no. 2, 343–389. [RT90] N. Yu. Reshetikhin and V. G. Turaev, Ribbon graphs and their invariants derived from quantum groups, Comm. Math. Phys. 127 (1990), no. 1, 1–26. [Shi18] K. Shimizu, Ribbon structures of the Drinfeld center of a finite tensor category, arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.09691v2 [math.QA] (2018). [Shi19a] , Non-degeneracy conditions for braided finite tensor categories, Adv. Math. 355 (2019), 106778, 36. [Shi19b] , Recent developments of the categorical Verlinde formula, Proceedings of the Meeting for Study of Number Theory, Hopf Algebras and Related Topics, 2019, pp. 197–222. [Shu94] M. C. Shum, Tortile tensor categories, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 93 (1994), no. 1, 57–110. [Som96] Y. Sommerh¨auser, Deformed enveloping algebras, New York J. Math. 2 (1996), 35–58, electronic. [Tur92] V. G. Turaev, Modular categories and 3-manifold invariants, 1992, pp. 1807–1824. Topological and quantum group methods in field theory and condensed matter physics. [TV17] V. Turaev and A. Virelizier, Monoidal categories and topological field theory, Progress in Mathematics, vol. 322, Birkh¨auser/Springer, Cham, 2017.

School of Mathematical Sciences, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK Email address: [email protected]

Department of Mathematics, Rice University, P.O. Box 1892, Houston, TX 77005-1892, USA Email address: [email protected]