Quantum character varieties and braided module categories

Selecta Mathematica, Jul 2018

We compute quantum character varieties of arbitrary closed surfaces with boundaries and marked points. These are categorical invariants \(\int _S{\mathcal {A}}\) of a surface S, determined by the choice of a braided tensor category \({\mathcal {A}}\), and computed via factorization homology. We identify the algebraic data governing marked points and boundary components with the notion of a braided module category for \({\mathcal {A}}\), and we describe braided module categories with a generator in terms of certain explicit algebra homomorphisms called quantum moment maps. We then show that the quantum character variety of a decorated surface is obtained from that of the corresponding punctured surface as a quantum Hamiltonian reduction. Characters of braided \({\mathcal {A}}\)-modules are objects of the torus category \(\int _{T^2}{\mathcal {A}}\). We initiate a theory of character sheaves for quantum groups by identifying the torus integral of \({\mathcal {A}}={\text {Rep}}_{q}G\) with the category \({\mathcal {D}}_q(G/G)\)-mod of equivariant quantum \({\mathcal {D}}\)-modules. When \(G=GL_n\), we relate the mirabolic version of this category to the representations of the spherical double affine Hecke algebra \({\mathbb {SH}}_{q,t}\).

A PDF file should load here. If you do not see its contents the file may be temporarily unavailable at the journal website or you do not have a PDF plug-in installed and enabled in your browser.

Alternatively, you can download the file locally and open with any standalone PDF reader:

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs00029-018-0426-y.pdf

Quantum character varieties and braided module categories

Quantum character varieties and braided module categories David Ben-Zvi 0 1 2 Adrien Brochier 0 1 2 David Jordan 0 1 2 B David Jordan 0 1 2 0 School of Mathematics, University of Edinburgh , Edinburgh , UK 1 MPIM , Bonn , Germany 2 Department of Mathematics, University of Texas , Austin, TX 78712-0257 , USA We compute quantum character varieties of arbitrary closed surfaces with boundaries and marked points. These are categorical invariants S A of a surface S, determined by the choice of a braided tensor category A, and computed via factorization homology. We identify the algebraic data governing marked points and boundary components with the notion of a braided module category for A, and we describe braided module categories with a generator in terms of certain explicit algebra homomorphisms called quantum moment maps. We then show that the quantum character variety of a decorated surface is obtained from that of the corresponding punctured surface as a quantum Hamiltonian reduction. Characters of braided A-modules are objects of the torus category T 2 A. We initiate a theory of character sheaves for quantum groups by identifying the torus integral of A = Repq G with the category Dq (G/G)-mod of equivariant quantum D-modules. When G = G L n , we relate the mirabolic version of this category to the representations of the spherical double affine Hecke algebra SHq,t . Mathematics Subject Classification 17B37 · 16T99 1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 Braided module categories and quantum moment maps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Contents 1.2 Computing factorization homology of marked surfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3 Quantization of character varieties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.4 Towards quantum character sheaves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.5 The double affine Hecke algebra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Factorization homology of surfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1 Factorization homology of surfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 Marked points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 Boundary conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Braided module categories and surfaces with marked points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1 The oriented case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Reconstruction theorems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1 Reconstruction from tensor functors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2 Reconstruction for the annulus category . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3 Braided module structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Closed surfaces, markings and quantum Hamiltonian reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1 Marked points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2 The functor of global sections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Introduction Let S denote a topological surface and G a reductive group. The G-character stack ChG (S) of S is the moduli space of G-local systems on S, the quotient of the affine scheme of representations of the fundamental group of S into G by the conjugation action of G. Character stacks—and their variants associated to surfaces with marked points or other decorations, which we collectively refer to as character varieties—play a central role in geometry, representation theory and physics. A crucial feature of character stacks is their local nature—they are obtained from gluing stacks of local systems on patches of S. As a result they provide a natural source of topological field theories: numbers, such point counts/Euler characteristics of character varieties appear in two-dimensional field theory; vector spaces such as sections of line bundles on character varieties appear in three-dimensional field theory; and finally, categories of sheaves on character varieties appear naturally in four-dimensional field theory. We will be concerned with the four-dimensional setting, accessing character varieties through their categories of coherent sheaves, as they appear in the Betti form of the Geometric Langlands program and in twisted d = 4 N = 4 super-Yang-Mills theory, following the work of Kapustin-Witten [ 13 ]. Our goal is to construct and describe quantum character varieties—q-deformations of these categories, which quantize the Goldman symplectic structure on the character stack (associated to a choice of invariant form on g). Moreover we endow these quantum character varieties with all of the structures expected from their origin in topological field theory, and develop their study as a natural setting for a variety of constructions in quantum algebra. In [ 10 ], we initiated the construction of quantum character varieties via factorization homology of braided (or balanced) tensor categories A on topological surfaces: this produces category-valued invariants of framed (or oriented) topological surfaces, with the desired strong functoriality and locality properties. Starting from the braided tensor category A = Repq G of integrable representations of the corresponding quantum group yields the desired functorial quantizations. We computed these invariants for unmarked punctured surfaces, in terms of certain explicitly presented, and in many cases well-known, quantum algebras, which were constructed as certain twisted tensor products of the so-called “reflection equation algebra” FA ∈ A. In the present paper, we extend this framework to the setting of closed surfaces, as well as to surfaces with marked points. In brief, our main results are as follows: • The possible markings of points (codimension two defects) in the topological field theory defined by A are given by module categories over the monoidal category Ann A. In [ 10 ] we identified the underlying category with modules FA -modA for the reflection equation algebra of A. In Sect. 4.2 we explicitly identify the new induced monoidal structure on this category, the field-goal tensor product. • We show in Theorem 3.11 that codimension two defects ( Ann A-modules) are identified with braided module categories over A (in the sense of [ 7,8,23 ]), in the same way that the unmarked disc is assigned A (see Sect. 2.1 for an introduction to factorization homology of marked surfaces). There are many natural examples of braided module categories (see below), including ones corresponding to versions of character varieties with parabolic structures, fixed conjugacy classes, or other boundary conditions (codimension one defects wrapping a circle). They play the role for the 4d Kapustin-Witten (Betti Geometric Langlands) TFT that integrable representations of the loop group play for the 3d Chern-Simons (Witten-Reshetikhin-Turaev) theory. • In Theorem 1.1, we identify braided module categories with a generator as modules for an algebra object AM ∈ A equipped with a “quantum moment map”, i.e. an algebra homomorphism, μ : FA → AM. As we explain, μ is a quantum version of a group-valued moment map appearing in the classical setting [ 3 ]. • We describe (in Theorems 4.1, Proposition 4.3, and Corollary 4.8) the result of gluing braided module categories with generators over their common braided Aaction as a category of bimodules in Ann A. The quantum moment maps play a key role in defining the bimodule structure, and the resulting categories may be regarded as categorical quantum Hamiltonian reductions, along the respective quantum moment maps. • In particular, we compute the “global functions” on general quantum character varieties: the endomorphisms of the quantum structure sheaf on a closed (or marked) surface are identified as the quantum Hamiltonian reduction of the algebra AS◦ associated to a punctured surface along the corresponding quantum moment map. • The torus integral T 2 A of a balanced tensor category A is identified with the trace (or Hochschild homology) of the 2-category of braided A-modules, i.e., the natural receptacle for characters of braided modules. For A = Repq G we identify the torus integral with the category Dq (G/G) -mod of adjoint-equivariant quantum D-modules, thus providing an interpretation for these characters as quantum analogues of character sheaves. • For G = G Ln, the category Dq (G/G) -mod has a “mirabolic” version obtained by marking a single point in T 2 by the quantum “Ruijsenaars–Schneider” conjugacy class N = At -modA. We show that we recover Cherednik’s spherical double affine Hecke algebra SHq,t , as the “global functions” (endomorphisms of the quantum structure sheaf). Hence, the global sections of any mirabolic quantum D-module carries a canonical action of the spherical double affine Hecke algebra. 1.1 Braided module categories and quantum moment maps Factorization homology provides a general mechanism to construct invariants of nmanifolds starting from algebras A over the En (little n-disks) operad—i.e., objects which carry operations labeled by inclusions of disks into a larger disk (see Sect. 2.1 for a brief review). The invariant M A of an n-manifold is then defined as the universal recipient of maps from A for every inclusion of a disk into M , and factoring through the operad structure. There is a natural operadic notion of module M for an En-algebra A, captured pictorially by placing the module at a marked point of a disk and allowing insertions of A at disjoint disks. It is well-known (see e.g. [ 2,35 ]) that the structure of Enmodule over an En-algebra A on M is equivalent to the structure of left module over the associative (E1) “universal enveloping algebra” U (A), namely the factorization homology U (A) = Ann A of an annulus with coefficients in A. The latter category is equipped with an E1 (monoidal) structure, coming from concatenation of annuli. This is the structure used in the excision axiom on Ann = Sn−1 × I (see Sect. 3 for more details) by which one computes factorization homology. In [ 10 ] we initiated the study of factorization homology of surfaces with coefficients in braided tensor categories, which are precisely the E2-algebras in a certain 2-category C = Pr of linear categories with the Kelly-Deligne tensor product. (More precisely, braided tensor categories A can be integrated over framed surfaces, while equipping A with a balanced structure extends this integral to oriented surfaces.) In the same way, factorization homology of surfaces with marked points demands that for each marked point we give an E2-module M over our chosen braided tensor category A. In Theorem 3.11, we show that in the case C = Pr, the notion of an E2-module is equivalent to that of a “braided module category”, a concept introduced in [ 7,8,23 ], and closely related to the reflection equation algebra. We also introduce the notion of a “balanced braided module category”, which captures the structure of a Disk2or -module (i.e. the oriented marked case), and we show in Theorem 3.12 that, when A itself is balanced, it endows any of its braided module categories with a canonical (though not unique) balancing. Examples of braided module categories include the following: (1) The category A itself is a braided A-module. It corresponds to the “vacuum marking”, and is an essential component in our computation for unmarked surfaces. (2) For any surface S◦ with circle boundary, the category S◦ A is a braided module category, by insertions of annuli along the boundary. In [ 10 ], we identified S◦ A with the category of modules for an explicitly constructed algebra AS◦ . (3) Quantizations of conjugacy classes in G, following [ 18–20,39 ], define braided module categories. An important example is the so-called Ruijsenaars–Schneider conjugacy class, consisting of matrices which differ from the identity by a matrix of rank at most one [ 6,38,46 ]. (4) Examples of braided module categories related to a variant of the trigonometric Knizhnik–Zamolodchikov equation, and the theory of dynamical quantum groups, appear in [ 7,8,23 ]. (5) A “boundary condition” is the local marking data for a half-plane. Algebraically, this is the data of a tensor category B attached to the boundary, together with a braided tensor functor A → Z (B) to the Drinfeld center of B. The trace, or Hochschild homology category, of such a B carries the structure of a braided module category for A. Important examples are provided by parabolic subgroups. In [ 10 ], we identified Ann A with the category of modules for the “reflection equation algebra” FA ∈ A. In the case A = Repq G, FA is a quantization of the coordinate algebra O(G), equipped with its Semenov-Tian-Shansky Poisson bracket. In Sect. 4.2, we prove the following theorem, giving yet a third reformulation of the notion of a braided module category, in terms of FA: Theorem 1.1 Let M be a braided module category. (1) For every M ∈ M, we have a canonical homomorphism of algebras, μM : FA → EndA(M ). We call μM the quantum moment map attached to M . (2) Assuming M is a progenerator for the A-action1, we moreover have an equivalence of Ann A-module categories, (3) The action of any X ∈ Ann A on any N ∈ M by relative tensor product, EndA(M ) -mod Ann A is given M EndA(M ) -mod Ann A . N X → N ⊗ X , FA over the homomorphism μM . Conversely, given an algebra A ∈ A and a homomorphism μ : FA → A, the category M = A -modA is equipped with the structure of a braided module category, with action as in (3). The regular A-module A ∈ M is an A-progenerator in this case. Natural examples of quantum moment maps arise in the following contexts: (1) The quantum moment map for A itself is the co-unit homomorphism, : FA → 1A, which quantizes the homomorphism of evaluation of a function at the identity element. (2) In Sect. 4, we obtain canonical quantum moment maps μ : FA → AS◦ which control the braided module category structure on S◦ A. These quantize the classical multiplicative moment maps, which send a local system to its monodromy around the puncture. 1 Equivalently, for the Ann A-action; see Theorem 4.3. (3) By their construction—as equivariant quotients of the reflection equation algebra—quantizations of conjugacy classes carry canonical quantum moment maps. 1.2 Computing factorization homology of marked surfaces Let us fix a surface S equipped with a marked point x ∈ S, a disc Dx containing x , and a braided module category M. Let S◦ = S\x , and fix a disc embedding ix : Dx ⊂ S, and resulting annulus embedding Ann Dx \x ⊂ S. We may then compute the factorization homology using excision, (A, Mx ) (S,x) A S◦ A Ann Mx . Building on Theorem 1.1 we can describe the tensor product above explicitly, in the language of quantum Hamiltonian reduction. Theorem 1.2 Let ix∗ : M → (S,x)(A, M) denote the push-forward in factorization homology along the embedding ix . (1) For any M ∈ M, we have a natural isomorphism: End (ix∗(M )) ∼= AS◦ μ M := Hom(1A, AS◦ F⊗A EndA(M )), of the endomorphism algebra of ix∗(M ), in the category (S,x)(A, Mx ) with the quantum Hamiltonian reduction of AS◦ along the quantum moment map μM . (2) Suppose that M is an A-progenerator. Then we have equivalences of categories, (A, M) (S,x) A S◦ A Ann M ( AS◦ -mod- End(M ))FA -mod, with the category of bimodules for AS◦ and End(M ), in the category FA -mod. (3) The quantum global sections functor = Hom(i∗(M ), −) : S A → ( AS◦ μ M )op -mod, valued in the category of modules for the quantum Hamiltonian reduction is naturally equivariant for actions of the marked-and-colored mapping class group of the surface. This Theorem (more generally in the case of several marked points) is proved in Sect. 4. In particular we obtain a description of the category associated to a closed unmarked surface S. Choose some disk D2 ⊂ S, and let S◦ denote its complement in S. Corollary 1.3 We have an equivalence of categories, S A A S◦ A Ann A ( AS\D2 -mod- 1A)FA -mod, with the category of bimodules for AS◦ and AD2 = 1A, in the category FA -mod. Likewise we can identify global functions on the quantum character variety (i.e., endomorphisms of the quantum structure sheaf OA,S ) with the quantum Hamiltonian reduction of AS◦ along the quantum moment map μ, End(OA,S ) =∼ AS◦ AS◦ · μ(ker( )) inv . Thus we have a global sections functor = Hom(OA,S, −) : S A → (AS◦ 1 )op -mod, μ A valued in the category of modules for the quantum Hamiltonian reduction, equivariant for an action of the mapping class group of the surface. 1.3 Quantization of character varieties In the classical setting A = Rep G, it was a fundamental observation of [ 3 ] that G character varieties of closed surfaces could be obtained via “multiplicative Hamiltonian reduction” of their punctured counterparts. Let us briefly recall the classical construction here. Let S◦ be a surface with one distinguished circle boundary component with a point p chosen on it. Let RG (S◦) denote the representation variety of S◦, i.e. RG (S◦) = {ρ : π1(S, p) → G}. Equivalently, RG (S◦) is the variety of G-local systems on S◦, equipped with a trivialization of the fiber at p. Changing the choice of trivialization amounts to conjugating a given homomorphism by a group element. Hence, the G-character stack of S is the quotient stack ChG (S◦) = RG (S◦)/G. μ : RG (S◦) −→ RG ( Ann) = G. The embedding of the annulus around the circle boundary of S induces a G-equivariant map, The map μ is called a “multiplicative” or “group-valued” moment map, in [ 3 ]. Fix a conjugation invariant subvariety C ⊂ G (i.e., a union of conjugacy classes). Then μ−1(C ) ⊂ RG (S) is a G-stable subvariety. The character stack of (S, C ) is then the quotient stack ChG (S, C ) = μ−1(C )/G. In other words, ChG (S, C ) is a moduli stack of G-local systems on S◦ whose monodromy around the boundary lies in C . By definition, the category QCoh(ChG (S, C )) is the category of G-equivariant quasi-coherent sheaves on μ−1(C ). The variety μ−1(C )/G is called the “multiplicative Hamiltonian reduction” of RG (S◦) along μ. The main results of [ 10,12 ], give identifications, S◦ G -mod QCoh(Ch(S◦)), AS◦ =∼ O(G2g). The category QCoh(C /G) is a braided module category for Rep G, which we may associate to the puncture, and the category QCoh(μ−1(C )/G) is precisely the category produced by factorization homology for a marked surface (S, x ), where the marked point is decorated with QCoh(C /G). When we instead take A = Repq G, excision gives rise to “quantum multiplicative Hamiltonian reduction”, as discussed in e.g. [ 38 ]. Therefore, we obtain quantizations of character stacks of closed surfaces. Taking global sections passes to the affinization of the character stack, the Poisson variety obtained as the categorical quotient RG (S) // G. More generally if C is any conjugacy class, the categorical quotient μ−1(C ) // G is a symplectic leaf of the Poisson variety RG (S) // G (the case of the closed surface corresponds to C = {e}. In [ 18–20 ] an explicit quantization of any given conjugacy class is given, using Verma modules: by construction these come equipped with an equivariant algebra map from Oq (G). By Theorem 1.1 the category of equivariant modules over this algebra is a braided module category, hence its factorization homology over the marked surface as above gives a quantization of the variety μ−1(C ) // G. 1.4 Towards quantum character sheaves The invariant assigned to the torus S = T 2 plays a central role in topological field theory. In three-dimensional Chern-Simons/Witten-Reshetikhin-Turaev theory at level k the invariant of T 2 is identified on the one hand with the Verlinde algebra, the group of characters of integrable level k representations of the loop group (which themselves form the invariant of S1, i.e., the Wilson lines or codimension two defects). The natural mapping class group symmetry of the torus invariant then explains the well-known modularity of these characters. On the other hand the Freed–Hopkins Teleman theorem [ 26 ] identifies the T 2 invariant with a version of class functions on the compact group, namely the twisted equivariant K -theory of Gc/Gc. In this section we describe the corresponding roles of the quantum character variety of the torus. Let us consider the oriented field theory defined by integrating a balanced tensor category A on oriented surfaces. We have identified codimension two defects for quantum A-character varieties with braided A-modules, i.e., modules for U (A) = Ann A, which thanks to the balancing is also identified (as monoidal category) with the cylinder integral Cyl A (see Remark 3.6). In the language of extended topological field theory, this means we attach the 2-category U (A) -mod to the circle. The excision axiom applied to a decomposition of T 2 into cylinders allows us to identify the torus integral as the monoidal Hochschild homology, or trace, of the cylinder (hence annulus) integral of A: T 2 A U (A) U (A) U (A)op U (A) = T r (U (A)). Equivalently, we can describe the torus integral as the trace (or Hochschild homology) of the 2-category of braided A-modules. It follows from the general theory of characters in Hochschild homology (see e.g. [ 12 ] for references) that T 2 A carries characters [M] ∈ T 2 A for sufficiently finite (i.e., dualizable) braided A-modules M. Remark 1.4 (Braided G-categories and loop group categories) The 2-category of braided Repq G-modules is a 4d gauge theory analog of the category of integrable level k representations of the loop group. Indeed, it is the Betti form [ 13 ] of the 2category of chiral module categories over the Kazhdan-Lusztig category of integrable representations of the loop algebra, which itself is a form of the local geometric Langlands 2-category of categories with an action of the loop group at level k (where q is essentially exp(2π i /k)), see [ 33 ]. In the case A = Repq G, in [ 10 ] we identified the punctured torus category with the category of modules in Repq G for the algebra of quantum differential operators, considered as an algebra object in Repq G under the adjoint action: T 2\D2 Repq (G) Dq (G) -modRepq G . Note that since we are considering modules in Repq G rather than V ect , this category is a quantum analog not of the category of D-modules on G but of the category of D-modules on G which are weakly equivariant for the adjoint action (from which the former can be obtained by de-equivariantization). It follows from the quantum Hamiltonian reduction formalism of the previous section that sealing up the puncture results in imposing the quantum moment map relations for the adjoint action—i.e., in imposing strong equivariance. We define: Definition 1.5 The category Dq ( GG ) -mod of strongly ad-equivariant Dq (G)-modules has its objects pairs (M , φ) consisting of a Dq (G)-module M ∈ Dq (G) -modA, and an action map, φ : M O⊗A 1A → M in the category Dq (G) -modA, satisfying the associativity conditions making M into an 1A-module. As a corollary of Theorem 1.1, we have: Theorem 1.6 We have equivalences of categories, T 2 Repq G T r (U (A)) Dq G G -mod . In particular Dq ( GG ) -mod inherits an action of S L2(Z), including a quantum Fourier transform (S-transformation) generalizing the difference Fourier transform in the case G = H a torus. Indeed the endomorphisms of the quantum structure sheaf are known in many cases (see below for the t -analog) to recover End(ORepq G,T 2 ) ∼= Dq (H )W , the algebra of W -invariant q-difference operators on the torus H . This should be compared to the computation of [ 24 ]. It follows that, in analogy with the Freed–Hopkins–Teleman theorem for Chern– Simons theory, the characters of braided Repq G-modules form quantum D-modules on G/G. This is a quantum analog of the interpretation [ 11 ] of Lusztig character sheaves in D(G/G) -mod in terms of module categories for D-modules on G. We likewise expect a theory of quantum character sheaves to provide a natural q-analog of the Lusztig theory. Interesting examples of such quantum character sheaves are provided by the quantum Springer sheaves—the characters of the braided module category tr (Repq B) associated to the Repq G-algebra defined by the quantum Borel (or other parabolics), which can be expected via a quantum Hotta-Kashiwara theorem to be described by a q-analog of the Harish-Chandra system. In particular one expects G ) -mod to carry a “quantum generalized Springer” the entire torus category Dq ( G orthogonal decomposition into blocks labeled by cuspidal objects associated to Levi subgroups, in analogy with the results of [ 37 ] for D(g/G). 1.5 The double affine Hecke algebra The double affine Hecke algebra (abbreviated DAHA, and denoted Hq,t ) associated to G = G L N (or more generally to a reductive group G) is a celebrated two-parameter deformation of the group algebra of the double affine Weyl group of G, introduced by Cherednik. It contains as a subalgebra the spherical DAHA (denoted SHq,t ), which is a flat one-parameter deformation of the algebra Dq (H )W of W -invariant q-difference operators on the torus H ⊂ G. The spherical DAHA for G Ln appears naturally [ 43 ] as a quantization of the phase space of the trigonometric Ruijsenaars–Schneider system [ 27–29,44 ] (also known as the relativistic version of the trigonometric Calogero– Moser system), a many-body particle system with multiplicative dependence on both positions and momenta. The phase space of this integrable system in turn has a wellknown interpretation [ 30,36 ] in terms of the character variety of the torus, marked by a distinguished “mirabolic” conjugacy class at one point. Namely it is identified with a space of “almost-commuting” matrices, invertible matrices whose commutator lies in a minimal conjugacy class (differing from a scalar matrix by a matrix of rank one). In this section, we will explain how our theory of quantum character varieties naturally produces the spherical DAHA when fed the torus T 2 marked by the quantum mirabolic conjugacy class. It is known that the spherical DAHA SHq,t may be obtained from the algebra Dq (G) of quantum differential operators on G by quantum Hamiltonian reduction along the quantum moment map μq : Oq (G) → Dq (G) at a certain equivariant two-sided ideal It ⊂ Oq (G), depending on a parameter t . The ideal It is a canonical q-deformation of the variety of matrices which differ from the scalar matrix t · id by a matrix of rank at most one. These results give rise to multiplicative analogues of the relation between the trigonometric Cherednik algebra (quantizing the trigonometric Calogero–Moser phase space) and mirabolic D-modules, see [ 22,25,34 ]. Theorem 1.7 We have an isomorphism of algebras ( A(T 2)◦ /It )Uq glN ∼= SHq,t (G L N ), in the following settings: (1) When q is a root of unity [ 46 ], (2) When q = e ( formal) for the Drinfeld-Jimbo category [ 38 ], (3) For arbitrary q ∈ C× when N = 2 [ 6 ]. More precisely, we have slightly reformulated each result here, for a more uniform presentation. Let us spell out the dictionary here, for the reader’s convenience. In [ 46 ], an algebra of quantum differential operators on G L N × PN −1 is constructed, along with a quantum moment map. In the notation of [ 38 ], this same algebra is denoted Dq (Matd(Q)), for (Q, d) = •1 → N• , and is an important special case of the quiver construction. We have isomorphisms of algebras, N Oq (G) ∼= Oq (• ) ∼= A Ann, N Dq (G L N ) =∼ Dq (• ) ∼= A(T 2)◦ , where each the first isomorphisms is clear from inspection of the defining relation, and while the second are special cases of the main result of [ 10 ]. The PN −1 factor in [ 46 ], and the extra vertex on the quiver in [ 38 ], each give rise to the deformed ideal It , and so in each of the three cases of the theorem, one obtains the same quantum Hamiltonian reduction algebra. By Theorem 1.1, we may define a braided module category Mt = At -modA, where At := Oq (G)/It comes equipped with a canonical quantum moment map, as a quotient of Oq (G). Finally, the quantum Hamiltonian reduction computed in those papers is precisely that which appears in Theorem 1.7. We therefore obtain the following important corollary: Corollary 1.8 Let A = Repq G Ln, M = Mt , S = (T 2, x ) the closed torus, with a single marked point x colored by Mt . Then we have an isomorphism, End(ix∗( At )) ∼= SHq,t (G Ln), of the endomorphism algebra of ix∗( At ) as an object of (T 2,x)(A, Mt ), and spherical DAHA SHq,t (G Ln). Hence, we obtain a marked mapping class group-equivariant “global sections” functor : (T 2,x) M → (A, Mt ) → SHq,t (G Ln) -mod, Hom(ix∗( At ), M ) from factorization homology of the marked torus to spherical DAHA-modules. More generally, the category (T 2,x)(A, Mt ) provides a quantum version of the category of mirabolic D-modules studied in [ 4,25,42 ] and others, of which representations of spherical DAHA provide the “principal series” part. This result gives a topological explanation of the existence of a quantum Fourier transform on SHq,t (G Ln) leading to an action of the marked torus mapping class group S L2(Z) by algebra automorphism. It also justifies the moniker “operator-valued Verlinde algebra”, by which Cherednik first referred to his DAHA [ 14,15 ]: while the Verlinde algebra is attached to T 2 by the 3d Witten-Reshetikhin-Turaev theory, we see that the spherical double affine Hecke algebra is the affinization of the category attached to a marked T 2 by the 4D theory, so that it obtains all the topological symmetries of the torus from functoriality of the construction. 2 Factorization homology of surfaces In this section we briefly review factorization homology of stratified n-manifolds, following [ 1,2,40 ]. We will put special emphasis on the case n = 2, of surfaces— possibly marked and/or with boundary—and with values in certain 2-categories Rex or Pr, of k-linear categories (see [ 10 ] for a review of Rex / Pr as settings for factorization homology): in this case, many of the structures demanded by the general framework of factorization homology recover well-known structures in quantum algebra. As in loc. cit. our main example will be the balanced tensor category Repq G: this notation means we choose a reductive algebraic group G, a Killing form κ on g = Li e(G), and consider either the category of finite-dimensional Uq (g)-modules, when G is simply connected, or the corresponding braided tensor subcategory when G is not semisimple. We do not recall a presentation of Uq (g) here, but rather refer to e.g. [16, Sect. 9.1] for basic definitions. 2.1 Factorization homology of surfaces Let s stand in for either framing (fr) or orientation (or). We denote by Mflds2 the (∞, 1)-category, whose objects are (framed or oriented) 2-dimensional manifolds with corners and whose morphisms spaces are the ∞-groupoids of (framed or oriented) embeddings. We denote by Disks2 the full subcategory whose objects are arbitrary (possibly empty) finite disjoint unions of R2. Each category is naturally symmetric monoidal with respect to disjoint union. Definition 2.1 A Disks2-algebra in an (∞, 1) symmetric monoidal category C, for s ∈ { f r , or }, is a symmetric monoidal functor from Disks2 to C. Remark 2.2 A Disk2f r -algebra (or rather the image of R2) is usually called an E2algebra, or algebra over the little disk operad. Similarly a Disk2or -algebra is an algebra over the framed little disk operad. The data of A is completely determined, in the framed case, by the image A(R2) of the generator R2, and a collection of morphisms A k → A (including k = 0, which gives the unit map), and a well-known host of coherences. We abuse notation, and denote both the functor and its value on the generator R2 by the symbol A. In the oriented case, we have also to specify the “balancing” automorphism of the identity functor. This corresponds to the loop, in the space of oriented diffeomorphisms of a disc, which rotates θ degrees about the origin, for θ ∈ [0, 2π ]. Remark 2.3 Since our target is a (2,1)-category, functors from Mflds2 factors through its “homotopy (2,1)-category”, i.e. the category whose Hom spaces are fundamental groupoids of spaces of embeddings. Our main case of interest is when C = Rex or Pr is a certain symmetric monoidal 2-category of k-linear categories with the Kelly-Deligne tensor product (see Sect. 4 below, and Sect. 3 of [ 10 ] for details). In this case, the data of an E2-algebra consists of a braided tensor category structure on A(R2), which we denote simply as A, by abuse of notation. The data of a Disk2or -algebra is identified with a balanced braided tensor structure. The factorization homology S A of an E2-algebra (resp, Disk2or -algebra) A on a framed (resp, oriented) surface S is defined as a colimit, S A = (Rc2o)likm→SA k , over all framed (resp. oriented) embeddings of disjoint unions of discs into S, where the (1-, and 2-) morphisms in the diagram are comprised of the tensor functors A k → A, and their coherences (including the associativity and braiding isomorphisms). In other words (in the case C = Rex / Pr), it is the universal recipient of functors from A k labeled by collections of disjoint disks in S, and factoring through the Disk2or -algebra structure on A, whenever a disk embedding factors through inclusions of disks in a larger disk. Formally this colimit is expressed as a left Kan extension, Disks2 A Mflds2 − A C . An important feature of factorization homology is that the empty set is regarded as a surface, and has an initial embedding to any surface. This induces a map 1C ∅ A → S A, for any S. In the case C = Rex / Pr, we have 1C = Vect, so the initial functor is determined by the the image of k ∈ Vect. This equips all braided tensor categories appearing in the theory with their unit object, and equips factorization homology of any surface S with a distinguished object, which we called in [ 10 ] the “quantum structure sheaf,” OS,A ∈ S It follows that we can also calculate OA,S as the image of the unit in A under the map A → S A associated to any disc embedding. Factorization homology satisfies an important excision property. Given a 1manifold P, the factorization homology P×I A on the cylinder (with any framing) carries a canonical E1 (associative) algebra structure from the inclusion of disjoint unions of intervals inside a larger interval (i.e., we stack cylinders inside a larger cylinder, see Fig. 1). Moreover the invariant of a manifold with a collared boundary M is naturally a module over P×I A. This structure allows us to describe the factorization homology of a glued (framed or oriented) surface S = S1 P×I S2 as a relative tensor product: S A = S1 A P×AI In the case of punctured surfaces studied in [ 10 ], we exploited excision for P = I , an interval, to compute factorization homology categories as categories of modules for certain explicitly presentable “moduli algebras”. In the present paper, we will extend these descriptions to closed surfaces, and this involves applying excision in the case P = S1. For that case, we need to develop the theory of surfaces with marked points, and an explicit description for the tensor structure on the annulus. 2.2 Marked points Following [ 2 ], factorization homology for surfaces with marked points may be defined similarly as for unmarked surfaces, via a Kan extension from a category of marked discs to a category of marked surfaces. We denote by Disks2,mkd the (∞, 1)-category whose objects are disjoint unions of unmarked (framed or oriented) disks R2 and once-marked disks R20, and whose morphism spaces are spaces of (framed or oriented) embeddings, which are moreover required to send marked points bijectively to marked points. The data of a symmetric monoidal functor Disk2f r,mkd → C is equivalent to an E2algebra A (the restriction to unmarked disc) and an object M ∈ C assigned to a marked disc, equipped with the structure of E2-module over A (the intrinsic operadic notion of module for an E2-algebra). That is, M is equipped with a compatible collection of functors M A k → M determined by choosing embeddings from the disjoint union of one marked and k unmarked, disks back into the marked disk, satisfying a collection of coherences. By analogy, we will call the image of the once marked disk through a functor Disk2or ,mkd → C a Disk2or -module over the Disk2or -algebra image of the unmarked disk. Remark 2.4 The requirement that marked points map bijectively means that the empty set is no longer initial in the category of marked surfaces. Allowing maps which are only injective on marked points is equivalent to giving a pointing 1C → M with no additional coherences, and agrees with the notion of locally constant factorization algebra on the stratified space R2. 0 Similarly to ordinary factorization homology, a symmetric monoidal functor from Disks2,mkd to some target category C is determined by its values A, and M on the unmarked, and once-marked discs, respectively, together with a host of functors and coherences between various tensor products of A and M. Let us therefore denote such a functor by the pair (A, M). Definition 2.5 The factorization homology of the pair (A, M) is the left Kan extension, Disk2or ,mkd (A,M) Mfld2or ,mkd C . − (A, M) As for ordinary factorization homology of surfaces, the definition by left Kan extension implies a formula for the factorization homology of any marked surface as a colimit, (A, M) = (S,X ) colim (R2) k (R20) l →(S,X ) A k M l , over all embeddings of unmarked or once-marked discs into S. Just as for ordinary factorization homology, we have an excision property for computing factorization homology of marked surfaces. Let (S, X ) = (S1, X1) ∪P×I (S2, X2) be the relative union of marked surfaces (S1, X1) and (S2, X2), along some (unmarked) cylinder P × I . Then we have (A, M) = (S,X) (A, M) M1 A P×I (A, M). M2 2.3 Boundary conditions An important source of examples of markings of surfaces come from boundary conditions in the topological field theory defined by A, or concretely from factorization algebras on manifolds with boundary, extending A from the interior. We denote by Disk2f r/otd,bdr y the (∞, 1)-category whose objects are disjoint unions of unmarked (framed or oriented) disks R2 and half-spaces H = R × R≥0, and whose morphism spaces are spaces of (framed or oriented) embeddings, which are moreover required to respect boundaries. The data of a symmetric monoidal functor Disk2f r,bdr y → C, i.e., of a factorization algebra on the stratified space H, is equivalent to an E2-algebra A (the restriction to unmarked disc) and an object B ∈ C assigned to a half-space, equipped with the structure of A-algebra: an algebra object in C equipped with an E2-morphism z : A → Z(B) from A to the center Z(B) = E ndB Bop (B) of B (i.e. the pair (A, B) is an algebra over Voronov’s Swiss–cheese operad [ 45 ]). Here the algebra structure on B comes from the inclusion of unions of half spaces into half-spaces—i.e., B itself defines a one-dimensional factorization algebra valued in C. The central action comes from the inclusion of a disc into the half space. In the case C = Rex, this means we have a braided tensor category A, a tensor category B, and a functor of braided tensor categories from A to the Drinfeld center of B. Two rich sources of A-algebras, hence boundary conditions, for A a braided tensor category are: (1) Categories of modules B = B -mod for commutative (i.e., braided or E2) algebra objects B ∈ A. (2) The category B = Repq B, of torus-integrable representations of the quantum Borel subalgebra Uq (b+) ⊂ Uq (g) form a Repq G-algebra. This follows simply from the fact that R ∈ Uq (b+) ⊗ Uq (b−) ⊂ Uq (g) ⊗ Uq (g), where R is the quantum R-matrix which controls the braiding on Repq G. Hence R itself endows the forgetful functor Repq G → Repq B with the structure of a central functor. More generally quantum parabolic subgroups define boundary conditions. Given a surface with boundary (S, ∂ S) we can perform factorization homology (S,∂ S) (A, B) for the pair (A, B) following the same formalism as in the unmarked and marked cases. An A-algebra B is itself a one-dimensional factorization algebra and so can be integrated on closed one-manifolds P → P B. In particular we have the trace / cocenter / Hochschild homology category tr (B) = S1 B (S1×R≥0,S1) (A, B). We thus see that tr (B) is naturally an S1×R A-module. When A is balanced, this is identified with the annulus category U (A), and thus we find Proposition 2.6 Let A denote a ribbon category and B an A-algebra. (1) The trace tr (B) carries a natural structure of Disk2or A-module. (2) Let (S, ∂ S) denote a compact surface with boundary ∂ S identified with n(S1), and (S, {xi }) the closed surface with marked points obtaining by sewing in discs along ∂ S. Then the factorization homology of A on S with boundary marked by B agrees with that of A on S with points marked by tr (B): (S,∂ S) (A, B) S,{xi } (A, tr (B)). The proposition (in the case of representations of a quantum Borel or parabolic subgroup) allows us in particular to define parabolic versions of quantum character varieties, quantizing moduli of parabolic local systems. 3 Braided module categories and surfaces with marked points In this section, we identify the possible markings of points in factorization homology of marked surfaces in terms of explicit algebraic data called braided module categories. To begin, we recall that the factorization homology of the annulus inherits a natural tensor structure, coming from “stacking annuli”: Definition 3.1 The stacking tensor product on Ann A, denoted M , N M N , is: A, Ann where iin and iout are as depicted below. Remark 3.2 This same category carries a second tensor product, the pants, or convolution tensor product. Let Pant s denote a twice punctured disc, let i1 and i2 denote the inclusion of an annular boundary around the two punctures, and let iout denote the annular boundary around the outside of the disc. Then we define: TPants := io∗ut ◦ (i1 i2)∗ : A Ann and the stacking tensor product is the pointwise tensor product of quasi-coherent sheaves on the stack GG , while the pants tensor product is the convolution along the diagram, G G quot. G × G mult. G G × G ←−−− G −−−→ G . The convolution tensor structure does not play a role in this paper, as it is the stacking tensor product which features in the excision axiom. There is a natural operadic notion of module for an En-algebra A, the notion of En-module (which for n = 1 recovers the notion of bimodule rather than module over an associative algebra), see [ 31,41 ] and [35] for a review. Intuitively an En-module is an object placed at the origin in Rn and admitting operations from insertions of A at disjoint points (or disks). This notion appears naturally in factorization homology, as the data required to extend the theory to manifolds with marked points. There’s a monadic description of En-modules over A as left modules over an E1-algebra U (A), the enveloping algebra of A, which is in turn readily identified with the factorization homology Ann A of A on the complement of the origin. We take this latter notion as our definition and refer to [ 31,35 ] for comparisons with the operadic notion. We will then give it a more algebraic description by reconciling it with the notion of a “braided module category” [ 8,23 ], in the case C = Rex. Definition-Proposition 3.3 ([ 35 ]) An E2-module for an E2-algebra A is a right module over the annulus category Ann A, with tensor structure TSt . In our setting, E2-algebras are identified with the notion of braided tensor categories; in the same spirit, we first show that the notion of E2-modules over braided tensor categories coincides with the notion of braided module categories defined as follows: Definition 3.4 ([ 8 ]) Let A be a braided tensor category, with braiding σ . A (strict2) braided module category over A is a (strict) right A-module category M equipped with a natural automorphism, E , of the action bifunctor satisfying the following axioms for all M ∈ M, X , Y ∈ A: ⊗ : M × A −→ M E M⊗X ,Y = σX−,1Y E M,Y σY−,1X and E M,X ⊗Y = E M,X E M⊗X ,Y σY ,X σX ,Y . E M,X ⊗Y = E M,X σX−,1Y E M,Y σX ,Y . (3.1) (3.2) (3.3) Remark 3.5 In the presence of (3.1), equation (3.2) is equivalent to the following version of the Donin–Kulish–Mudrov equation [ 17 ] This in turn implies the reflection equation, and hence that braided module categories give rise to representations of the braid group of the annulus. In fact equation (3.1) alone implies the reflection equation, but both are needed to describe the full E2-module structure. Remark 3.6 Axioms (3.1), (3.2) differ slightly from those in [ 8 ]: the latter characterizes modules over the factorization homology of S1 ×R equipped with the product/cylinder framing, while E2-modules are rather characterized as modules over the factorization homology of S1 × R equipped with the blackboard (annulus) framing. As there are an integer’s worth of framings on S1 × R, hence there are an integer’s worth of alternative notions of braided module category. When A is balanced, however the corresponding axioms are equivalent: indeed, if θ is the balancing and E satisfies the axioms stated above, then a straightforward computation shows that E −1(id ⊗θ −1) satisfies the axioms of [ 8 ]. We note that a similar phenomenon has appeared in the definition of the elliptic double of [ 5 ], where there are many possible definitions, which coincide in the case of a ribbon Hopf algebra. Here, in order to simplify the presentation, we stick to the balanced assumption and do not differentiate between these different framings. In order to identify the different notions of module category we will use a different description of the annulus than that which features in [ 10 ]. Rather than cutting it into two half-annuli, as we did there, we will make a single vertical cut at the top of the annulus and see the annulus as being obtained by self-gluing along this cut (see Fig. 2). Hence let Y be the manifold represented in Fig. 2. We stress the fact that for the gluing to make sense we need to regard it as a stratified manifold, and as such it 2 This assumption is made only to simplify the exposition: the non-strict axioms simply involve inserting associators in the obvious places in equations (3.1) and (3.2). Fig. 3 The A-bimodule Y A is obtained from the regular bimodule by precomposing the right action by the tensor functor (i d, σ 2) : A → A is not equivalent to the standard framed disc. Yet, its interior Y˚ , i.e. the manifold obtained from Y by forgetting the stratification, is equivalent as a framed manifold to the standard disc, hence we have an equivalence of underlying categories, Y A ˚ A Y A but the A-actions are different from the standard one. The A-bimodule action on Y A is induced by the embedding i R i0 i L : R2 Y˚ R2 → Y depicted in the left hand side of Fig. 2, i.e. it is the functor, (i R i0 i L )∗ : A Y A A → Y A, The double braiding σ 2 induces a non-trivial tensor structure on the identity functor of A. We denote by AA(id,σ 2) the twist of the regular bimodule category by this autoequivalence, i.e. the A-bimodule category whose underlying left module is the regular left A-module, but where the right action (in particular, its associativity constraint) is precomposed with (i d, σ 2). In Fig. 3, we demonstrate an equivalence between Y A and this twisted bimodule. To recover the factorization homology of the annulus from the bimodule Y A, we need to recall the notion of balanced functors of bimodules, and the resulting notion of the trace of a bimodule. To this end, let M be an A − A-bimodule category. Then a functor F : M → E is called balanced if there is a natural isomorphism F (m ⊗ X ) → F ( X ⊗ m) satisfying a natural coherence condition (see e.g. [ 32 ]). Definition 3.7 The trace tr M, of an an A-A-bimodule category M, is the Rexkcategory defined uniquely by the natural equivalence, Rexk[tr M, E ] BalA(M, E ). Remark 3.8 If M, N are right and left A-module categories, then M bimodule and clearly N is an AOn the other hand, an A-bimodule is the same as an A show that Arev-module and one can tr (M N ) M A N . tr M A A Arev M where A is given its natural A-bimodule structure (i.e., we recover the standard notion of Hochschild homology of a bimodule). Ann A is the trace in the sense of Definition 3.7 of the Proof It is clear that constructing the annulus by self-gluing from the manifold showed on Fig. 2 is the same as gluing both ends to a disk with two marked intervals and its standard framing, which corresponds to the regular bimodule A. Hence by the excision property we have: Ann A A A(id,σ 2) A Arev A tr AA(id,σ 2) . We can now prove: Proposition 3.10 Let A be a braided tensor category, B a tensor category. Then tensor functors Ann A → B are naturally identified with pairs (F , ν) where F is a tensor functor from A to B, and ν is a natural automorphism of F satisfying3: and 3 Here and in the proof we abuse notation and write σX,Y instead of F(σX,Y ). idX ⊗νY = σX−,1Y (νY ⊗ idX )σY−,1X νX⊗Y = (νX ⊗ νY )σY ,X σX,Y (3.4) (3.5) Proof Denote by and the left and right A-actions on itself described above. The description of Ann A as a coequalizer of those actions implies that functors out of it to a target category B are naturally identified with functors F : A → B equipped with a natural isomorphism ηX,Y : F (X ⊗ Y ) = F (X Y ) → F (Y ⊗ X ) = F (Y X ) satisfying the following coherence condition σZ,Y σY ,Z ηX,Y ⊗Z = ηZ⊗X,Y ηX⊗Y ,Z In order to characterize the monoidal structure on Ann A, we need to upgrade this coequalizer as the coequalizer of a diagram in tensor categories. Recall that any tensor functor F : A → B turns B into a left A-module using the following composition A F id B −−−→ B m B −→ B where m is the multiplication of B and the associativity constraint of the module structure is given by the monoidal structure on F . This also turn B into a right module by using the opposite multiplication instead. We note that both A actions at hand are of this form: the right action is just induced by the identity functor and the left action by the identity functor with monoidal structure given by the double braiding. Since the multiplication of A also carries a natural monoidal structure, this turns the maps involved in the defining diagram of Ann A into tensor functors. Now, (strict) monoidal functors out of Ann A to a monoidal category B can be characterized as strict monoidal functors F : A → B equipped with a cyclic structure η as above for which η is monoidal. This leads to the following identity: ηX⊗W ,Y ⊗Z σY ,W = σZ,Y σY ,Z σX,Z ηX,Y ηW ,Z The coherence condition implies that ηX,1 = idX . Hence define a natural automorphism of F by νX := η1,X . Setting X = Z = 1 gives so that η can be recovered from ν. For W = Y = 1 this gives Together those equations implies (3.4). Finally, setting X = W = 1 leads to ηW ,Y σY ,W = νY ηX,Z = σX,Z νZ . νX⊗Z = σZ,Y σY ,Z νX νZ . which up to relabelling is exactly (3.5). Hence, we have: Theorem 3.11 Let A be a braided tensor category. Then E2-modules over A are naturally identified with A-braided module categories in the sense of [8]. Proof A right module M over Ann A is characterized by the tensor functor Ann A → End(M) given by X → − ⊗ X . It means that M has to be an A-module and that one has to provide the functor A → End(M) with a natural automorphism satisfying the axioms above. This is straightforward to check that this turns M into a braided module category. 3.1 The oriented case Recall that factorization homology of framed surfaces descends to an invariant of oriented surfaces provided A is balanced, i.e. that A is endowed with an automorphism θ : idA → idA of the identity functor of A, satisfying the coherence relation, θV ⊗W = σW ,V ◦ σV ,W ◦ (θV ⊗ θW ). In the same way, one can ask what additional structure is needed on a braided module category M over a balanced braided monoidal category A in order to obtain invariants of oriented marked surfaces. We have: Theorem 3.12 Let A denote a braided tensor category and let M ∈ Rex. (1) Given a braided module category structure on M, the additional structure of a Disk2or -module extending A and M consists, first of all of a balancing on A, and secondly of a “balancing automorphism” φM : idM → idM of the identity functor on M, satisfying the coherence: φM⊗X = E M,X ◦ (φM ⊗ θX ) (3.6) We refer to a braided module category M, equipped with a φ , as a “balanced M braided module category”. (2) Suppose that A is a balanced braided tensor category, and that M is a braided module category for A. Then M admits a canonical structure of a balanced braided module category. Proof The first part is clear from the picture: φ is the automorphism of the identity functor of M induced by the rotation of a marked disc inside a larger one. If A is balanced, then Ann A is independent of the framing and in particular comes equipped with an automorphism of the identity functor ψ coming from the loop, in the space of oriented diffeomorphisms of the annulus, which rotates θ degrees about the origin, for θ ∈ [0, 2π ]. Let F = Fbd : A −→ Ann A be band tensor functor defined in Fig. 4, and ν the automorphism of F as in Proposition 3.10. It is again a direct check that for all X ∈ A, Fig. 4 Left: the tensor functor Fbd : A → Ann A is induced by an inclusion of a disc into a small radial band in the annulus. Right: the tensor structure induced by a commutative diagram, up to isotopy where we identify F (X ) with F (X ) ⊗ 1 Ann A. By Proposition 3.10, a braided module structure E on M is the same as a factorization of the functor A −→ End(M) A −→ Ann A −→ End(M ) and E is defined as the image of ν through the second functor. Taking the image of (3.7) through the second functor gives the desired balanced structure on M. Remark 3.13 We note that the balancing asserted in (2), while canonical, is not unique. There may be many different balancings on a given braided module category. 4 Reconstruction theorems In [ 10 ], we developed a framework to describe the gluing of surfaces along intervals in their boundary, using monadic techniques: the factorization homology for a surface with a marked interval in the boundary obtained the structure of an A-module category, and we realized these A-module categories as the categories of modules for explicit algebras AS in A. In this section, we will develop some of the general algebraic tools we will need to glue along circles, rather than intervals, in the boundary of a surface. Namely, the pointwise tensor structure from Fig. 4 defines a dominant tensor functor from A to Ann A, and we wish to apply monadic techniques to understand the resulting structures algebraically. Assumptions We will typically work with the (2, 1)-categories Rex of essentially small finitely cocomplete k-linear categories, right exact functors and their natural isomorphisms, and the (2, 1) category Pr of compactly generated presentable categories with compact and cocontinuous functors and their natural isomorphisms. These each carry the so-called Kelly-Deligne tensor product, and are in fact equivalent to one another as symmetric monoidal (2, 1)-categories: the functors ind and comp, of ind-completing a Rex category to a Pr category, and taking the Rex subcategory of compact objects of an Pr category, are mutually inverse equivalences. For orientation, let us remark that small abelian categories are in particular Rex, while Grothendieck abelian categories are in particular Pr. By a tensor (or braided tensor) category in Rex / Pr, we will mean simply an E1(or E2-) algebra A in Rex / Pr. We will typically assume that A is rigid, i.e. that all (compact) objects are left and right dualizable. This categorical framework is discussed in detail in [ 10 ], to which we refer the reader for complete definitions. 4.1 Reconstruction from tensor functors Let A and B be tensor categories in Pr and F : A → B be a tensor functor. Suppose that A is rigid, and assume the 1B is a pro-generator for the A-module structure on B induced by F 4. The definition of a pro-generator implies that F = act1 has B a cocontinuous right adjoint which is also faithful, i.e. F is dominant. Hence, by applying Theorem 4.5 from [ 10 ] to B as a A-module category, we see that B admits a simultaneous description, both as right-, and as left- End(1B)-modules in A, where we recall that End(1B) ∼= F R (1B). In this section, we extend this description to encompass the tensor structure on B as well. Theorem 4.1 We have: (1) Under this description F identifies with the free module functor V → End(1B) ⊗ V , and F R identifies with the forgetful functor back to A, where End means internal endomorphism of B as an A-module. (2) The right and left End(1B)-module structures on F R (b), for any b ∈ B, are related by the isomorphisms: End(1B) ⊗ F R (b) ∼= F R (1B ⊗ b) ∼= F R (b ⊗ 1B) =∼ F R (b) ⊗ End(1B).(4.1) These actions commute, and we obtain a faithful tensor functor, F R : B → End(1B)-bimodules in A. (3) Moreover F R becomes a tensor functor, when we equip the category of End(1B)bimodules in C with the relative tensor product of bimodules: M 4 Note that it is a pro-generator for the left A-action induced by F if and only if it is for the right one. Proof For Claim (1), we need a natural isomorphism F R F (V ) ∼= End(1B) ⊗ V . Applying the tensor structure and the adjunction counit, we obtain natural isomorphisms: Hom(C , F R F (V )) ∼= Hom(F (C ), F (V )) ∼= Hom(∗ F (V ) ⊗ F (C ), 1B) ∼= Hom(F (∗V ) ⊗ F (C ), 1B) ∼= Hom(F (∗V ⊗ C ), 1B) ∼= Hom(∗V ⊗ C , F R (1B)) ∼= Hom(C , F R (1B) ⊗ V ). Hence by Yoneda’s lemma, we have a natural isomorphism F R F (V ) ∼= F R (1B) ⊗ V , as desired. Claim (2) is clear: the End(1B)-actions on F R (b) are given in terms of the adjunction data (F , F R ); the isomorphisms (4.1) are natural in b, and interchange left and right modules in the adjunction. For Claim (3), we note that the category of F R (1B)-bimodules is generated under colimits by the free bimodules, so that if we have such an isomorphism for the free bimodules, it necessarily induces the same natural isomorphism for all bimodules. Hence, we may restrict to the case that M and N are of the form F (m), F (n), for some m, n ∈ B. In that case, applying F R F to the obvious idenity, m ⊗ n = colim actR m ⊗ 1A ⊗ n ⇒ m ⊗ n , actL gives F R (F (m) ⊗ F (n)) = F R colim actR F (m) ⊗ 1B ⊗ F (n) ⇒ F (m) ⊗ F (n) actL . While we cannot commute F R past the colimit, we have the canonical comparison map: colim actR F R (F (m) ⊗ 1B ⊗ F (n)) ⇒ F R (F (m) ⊗ F (n)) actL → F R colim actR F (m) ⊗ 1B ⊗ F (n) ⇒ F (m) ⊗ F (n) actL . Moreover, we have F R (F (m) ⊗ 1B ⊗ F (n)) ∼= F (m) ⊗ F R (1B) ⊗ F (n), because the right adjoint F R to the A-bimodule functor F is canonically a A-bimodule functor whenever A is rigid. Finally, we see that the comparison map is in fact an isomorphism, because F is the free bimodule functor. Having described the tensor structure on B monadically through A, we now turn to describing algebra objects, and hence module categories, for B, monadically in terms of A. We have: Proposition 4.2 The equivalence B End(1B) -modA extends to an equivalence: {Algebras in B} Algebras in A, equipped with an algebra homomorphism from End(1B) . Proof Given an algebra object b in B, its image F R (b) in A receives a canonical algebra homomorphism F R (1B) → F R (b), induced by the unit homomorphism 1B → b, through the lax tensor structure on F R . This provides a functor in the forward direction. Conversely, given an algebra in B equipped with a homomorphism from F R (1B), we make it an algebra in the category of F R (1B)-modules via this homomorphism; this clearly endows it with the structure of an algebra object in F R (1B)-modules. This provides a functor in the reverse direction. The two functors we have constructed are mutually inverse for tautological reasons: the unit homomorphism in the forward direction, and the F R (1B)-module structure in the reverse direction are simply equivalent data. Moreover, we can describe the B action on one of its module categories monadically through A: Theorem 4.3 Let M be a B-module category, and let M ∈ M be a progenerator for the induced A-action. Recalling the equivalences of A-modules, B modA −End(1B), M End(M ) -modA, and the canonical algebra homomorphism, ρ : End(1B) → End(M ), we have: (1) The action of any b ∈ B on any N ∈ M is given by: N b → b (2) The A-progenerator M is also a progenerator for the B-action. (3) The functor M = EndB(M ) -modB → EndA(M ) -modA induced by ρ is an equivalence of B-module categories. Proof The first claim is a direct application of Proposition 4.1. For the second claim, we recall that, to say M is a pro-generator, is to say that the functor actMR : M → B is conservative, and co-continuous. It follows from our assumptions that the composite functor F R ◦ act MR is conservative and co-continuous, as the action of A on M is obtained by pull-back, and M is assumed to be a A pro-generator. By assumption F R : B → A is conservative and co-continuous. It is an easy exercise that conservative and co-continuous functors themselves reflect conservativity and co-continuity. The third claim follows from monadicity for base change, Corollary 4.11 in [ 10 ]. And finally, we can compute relative tensor product of module categories, simply as categories of bimodules: Corollary 4.4 Fix A, B and F as in Proposition 4.2. Let M and N be left and right B-module categories, with A-progenerators m and n, respectively. Then we have an equivalence of categories, M B N (End(m) − End(n)) -bimodEnd(1B) -modA . Proof This is just an application of Theorem 4.9 from [ 10 ], and Proposition 4.3 above. 4.2 Reconstruction for the annulus category In this section, we apply the reconstruction techniques of the preceding section to the setting of factorization homology for braided module categories, to give a proof of Theorem 1.1. To begin with, we consider the inclusion j0 : D2 → Ann, given by including a small disk D2 into an annulus along some small band, as depicted in Fig. 4. Definition 4.5 The “band” tensor functor Fbd : A → Ann A is the functor ( j0)∗, induced by functoriality of factorization homology, with tensor structure induced by the commuting-up-to-isotopy diagram of inclusions, depicted in Fig. 4. With all of this framework in place, we turn to the proof of Theorem 1.1. Proof of Theorem 1.1 We shall apply the results of Sect. 4 to the special case that A is a braided tensor category in Rex, and D = Ann A FA -modA, F = Fbd . It follows from Theorem 4.16 of [ 10 ] that OA is a pro-generator for the A-action, and that Fbd =∼ actOA . Hence, by Theorem 4.1, Fbd is naturally isomorphic to the free module functor V → FA ⊗ V , and FbRd : Ann A → A identifies simply with the forgetful functor from FA -modA → A. For (1), the quantum moment map is that constructed in Proposition 4.2. For (2), Theorem 4.5 from [ 10 ], combined with Proposition 4.2, give equivalences: M EndA(M ) -modA End (M ) -mod A Ann A , where the latter is equipped with the algebra structure coming from the quantum moment map. Finally, (3) follows the same proof as Part (3) of Proposition 4.1. Unpacking the isomorphism of Theorems 4.1 and 4.3 in this case, we have the following corollaries: Corollary 4.6 Any left FA-module has a canonical right module structure. The left and right action are related using the “field goal” transform τm : FA ⊗ m → m ⊗ FA: τm = m FA FA m . For any M , N ∈ Ann A FA -modA, the pointwise tensor product M by the relative tensor product, N is given M N ∼= M ⊗ N := colim FA actR M ⊗ FA ⊗ N ⇒ M ⊗ N , actL where M is made into a right FA-module by the field goal transform. Corollary 4.7 We have an equivalence of categories, Algebras in A Ann aAllggeebbrraashionmAom,eoqrpuhipispmedfrwoimthFaAn . Moreover, given a module category M = A -modA, for an algebra A ∈ A equipped with an algebra morphism ρ : FA → A, the action of Ann A on M is given by: A -modA FA -modA −→ A -modA V M −→ V ⊗FA M where FA-acts on V via ρ. Corollary 4.8 Let M and N be a left and a right module category over Ann A with progenerators M and N , respectively. Then there is an equivalence of categories: M N A Ann (End(M ) − End(N )) -bimodFA -modA . 4.3 Braided module structure It follows from the above that if B is an algebra in A, every algebra morphism ρ : FA → B turns B -mod into a module category over Ann A. Hence ρ should correspond to a braided module structure on the category B -modA in the sense of Definition 3.4. In this section we make this structure explicit; the construction which follows can be interpreted as a generalisation of [ 17 ]. Let B be an algebra in A and an automorphism of the action functor We begin by constructing a morphism of underlying objects, B -modA ×A → B -modA . ρ : FA −→ B, as follows. Using the definition of FA as a co-end, it suffices to define ρ compatibly on each V ∗ ⊗ V , as below: 1B ⊗id⊗2 B,V ∗ ⊗id ρ |V ∗⊗V : V ∗ ⊗ V −−−−−→ B ⊗ V ∗ ⊗ V −−−−−→ B ⊗ V ∗ ⊗ V −id−⊗−→ev B It is easily checked that this system of maps descends to FA. Theorem 4.9 The morphism ρ is an algebra homomorphism if and only if satisfies equation (3.3): M,V ⊗W = σV−,1W M,W σV ,W M,V Proof Let m B denote the multiplication of B. On the one hand, we consider the composition, m B ◦ (ρB ⊗ ρB ): (V ∗ ⊗ V ) ⊗ (W ∗ ⊗ W ) → (B ⊗ V ∗ ⊗ V ) ⊗ (B ⊗ W ∗ ⊗ W ) B,V ∗ ⊗id ⊗ B,W∗ ⊗id −−−−−−−−−−−−−→ (B ⊗ V ∗ ⊗ V ) ⊗ (B ⊗ W ∗ ⊗ W ) → B ⊗ B −m−→B B. (4.2) (V ∗ ⊗ V ) ⊗ (W ∗ ⊗ W ) −σ−V −∗−⊗V−,−W→∗ (W ∗ ⊗ V ∗) ⊗ V ⊗ W B,W∗⊗V ∗ ⊗id → B ⊗ (W ∗ ⊗ V ∗) ⊗ V ⊗ W −−−−−−−−→ B ⊗ (W ∗ ⊗ V ∗) ⊗ V ⊗ W → B. (4.3) In order to simplify the computation, we precompose each side by σV−∗1⊗V ,W ∗ . Then the homomorphism equation (4.2) = (4.3) can be expressed as follows: L H S B W ∗ V ∗ V W W ∗ V ∗ V W W ∗ V ∗ V W W ∗ V ∗ V W Since is B-linear, B,− commutes with the action of b on itself by left multiplication. Thus, beginning with the LHS, we may slide the rightmost instance of over the multiplication, at which point the rightmost unit disappears. We have: Clearly, this equals the RHS if, and only if, we have W ∗ V ∗ B W ∗ V ∗ W ∗ V ∗ B W ∗ V ∗ Conjugating the above by σW ∗,V ∗ , and replacing V ∗, W ∗ with V , W gives equation (3.3). Therefore, compositions (4.2) and (4.3) coincide if and only if (3.3) holds. theWreearweialllsaoppcalynoTnhiecoalremmap4s.9 in the following particular case: by definition of FA, V ⊗ ∗V −→ FA where ∗V is the right dual of V . For M ∈ FA -modA and V ∈ A, let LA ∈ Aut (M ⊗ V ) be the operator defined by id⊗2 ⊗coevR σM,V ⊗∗V ⊗id M ⊗ V −−−−−−−→ M ⊗ V ⊗ ∗V ⊗ V −−−−−−−→ V ⊗ ∗V ⊗ M ⊗ V −→ FA ⊗ M ⊗ V −→ M ⊗ V where the last map is the action of FA on M . iPtrsoeplfoisnidtiuocne4d.1b0y LUAndiserththeeidiednetnittiyfi. cIantipoanrtuicsuedlairnthTihseiosraenma4lg.9e,btrhaemmoarpphfrisomm, FheAnctoe LA satisfies equation (3.3). Proof We have: ιV (ρOA )|V ∗⊗V = = ιV 1A V ∗ V Corollary 4.11 Let B be an algebra in A. If a braided module structure on B -mod, then ρ is an algebra morphism FA → B. Conversely, if ρ is an algebra morphism FA → B, then using ρ FA acts on any B-modules M , hence LA acts on M ⊗ V for V ∈ A and this turns B -mod into a braided module category. 5 Closed surfaces, markings and quantum Hamiltonian reduction We now close up punctured surfaces to describe quantum character varieties for closed, possibly marked, surfaces. For simplicity, we will begin with the unmarked situation. Fixing an inclusion D2 → S, and the corresponding boundary inclusions of the annulus into S◦ = S\D2 and D2 as boundary annuli, excision gives a canonical equivalence, S A S◦ A A Ann A. S◦ A Fb∗d S◦ Here A = D2 A is regarded as a braided module category over itself. We now proceed to compute these invariants explicitly via quantum Hamiltonian reduction. Recall that the algebra AS◦ is identified with act ORS◦ (OS◦ ) ∈ A, where A acts on S◦ A via insertion at some interval in the boundary annulus of A. We have A-module category equivalences, where Fbd : A → Ann A is the tensor functor from Definition 4.5, induced by the chain of inclusions depicted in Fig. 5. This means we are precisely in the situation of Sect. 4.2. We have canonical quantum moment maps, μ : FA → AS◦ , : FA → 1A, which are A-algebra homomorphisms realizing the braided module structures on S◦ A AS◦ -modA, D2 A A 1A -modA, respectively, and moreover we have equivalences of Ann A-module categories, S◦ A AS◦ -modFA -modA , D2 A 1A -modFA -modA between the factorization homology of S◦ (resp, D2), as module categories for the annulus category by stacking, and the categories of AS◦ -modules in A (resp, 1Amodules in A), equipped in each case with compatible actions of FA. Remark 5.1 The map μ is a generalization of the “quantum moment maps” studied in [ 38,46 ]; it quantizes the monodromy map, ChG (S\D2) → GG . As an application of Corollary 4.8, we obtain: Theorem 5.2 The category attached to a closed surface is given as ( AS◦ , 1A)bimodules in the annulus category, S A ( AS◦ -mod- 1A)FA -modA . Fig. 5 The action of A on S◦ A is obtained by pulling back the AnnA-action, through the tensor functor Fbd : A → Ann A 5.1 Marked points Let X ⊂ S denote a finite set of points. Let us fix braided A-module categories Mi attached to each points xi ∈ X , and let X = Dx1 ∪ · · · ∪ Dxr denote a tubular neighborhood of X , consisting of the disjoint union of some discs Dxi containing each point xi , and let S◦ = S\X . This data defines an invariant, (S, X ) → (A, {M1, . . . , Mr }) (S,X) of surfaces with marked point x labeled by M. Applying excision gives an equivalence: (A, {M1, . . . , Mr }) (S,X) A S◦ I (M1 · · · Mr ) . Now let us assume furthermore that each Mi is given as the category of modules for an algebra Ai ∈ A, i.e. that Giving such a presentation is equivalent to giving an A-progenerator Mi ∈ Mi as an A-module category, by taking Ai = End(Mi ). It follows from Theorem 1.1 that each Ai canonically receives a quantum moment map, A Ann Mi = Ai -modA . μi : FA → Ai , such that the Ann A-module action is identified with the relative tensor product over μi . Applying Corollary 4.8, we obtain: Theorem 5.3 The factorization homology of the marked surface (S, X ), with braided module categories Mi = mod- Ai attached to each xi is equivalent to the category, (S,X) (A, {M1, . . . , Mr }) ( AS\X -mod-( A1 · · · Ar )F r -modA , A of bimodules in F⊗Ar -modA for the pair of algebras AS\ Di2 and A1 · · · Ar . 5.2 The functor of global sections Let us now turn to computing the endomorphism algebra of the distinguished object OA,S ∈ S A. To this end, we recall first of all that we have an isomorphism, OA,S =∼ OA,S◦ OA,D2 . A Ann (5.1) More generally, for any braided module category M, and any N ∈ M, we have, ix∗(N ) ∼= OA,S◦ A Ann N . Theorem 5.4 We have an isomorphism of algebras, End(OA,S ) =∼ HomA 1A, AS\D2 F⊗A 1A , between the endomorphism algebra of the distinguished object and the Hamiltonian reduction algebra. More generally, if S is a surface with a point marked by a braided module category M, then, for any N ∈ M, we have an isomorphism of algebras: End(ix∗(N )) ∼= HomA 1A, AS\D2 F⊗A End(N ) , where the relative tensor product is taken over the canonical homomorphism ρ : FA → N given by Proposition 4.2. Proof The proof is based on a concrete description of Hom spaces between pure tensor products of objects in relative tensor product categories, which was proved in [ 21 ]. We recall: Proposition 5.5 ([21]) Given a right module category M, and a left module cate gory N over a rigid tensor category C, and m, m ∈ M, n, n ∈ N , we have an isomorphism, Hom M C N (m C n ) ∼= HomC (1C , Hom(m, m ) ⊗ Hom(n, n )). Combining the above proposition with the tensor product decomposition of equation (5.1), we have an isomorphism, C End S A(i∗(N )) ∼= End S A ⎝⎜ OA,S\D2 A Ann N ⎟ ⎠ ∼= Hom ∼= Hom Ann A Ann A FA, End Ann A(OA,S\D2 ) End Fbd (1A), End Ann A(OA,S\D2 ) ∼= HomA 1A, FbRd End Ann A(OA,S\D2 ) End Ann A End Ann A (N ) Ann A (N ) (N ) ∼= HomA 1A, AS\D2 F⊗A EndA(N ) , Remark 5.6 In the case A = Rep G, the distinguished object can be identified with the structure sheaf of the character stack. Hence the functor = Hom(OA,S , −) can be viewed as a “global sections functor” on the quantized character stack S Repq G. We note that the procedure prescribed in Theorem 5.4, of tensoring with the trivial module along the quantum moment map, and then taking invariants, is precisely the procedure of quantum Hamiltonian reduction. Acknowledgements We would like to thank Pavel Etingof and Benjamin Enriquez for sharing their ideas concerning elliptic structures on categories. We’d also like to thank John Francis, Greg Ginot, Owen Gwilliam, and Claudia Scheimbauer for discussions about factorization homology. The work of DBZ and DJ was partly supported by NSF grant DMS-1103525 and ERC Starting Grant 637618. DBZ and DJ would like to acknowledge that part of the work was carried out at MSRI as part of the program on Geometric Representation Theory. Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 1. Ayala , D. , Francis , J.: Factorization homology of topological manifolds . J. Topol . 8 ( 4 ), 1045 - 1084 ( 2015 ) 2. Ayala , D. , Francis , J. , Tanaka , H.: Factorization homology of stratified spaces . Selecta Mathematica 23 ( 1 ), 293 - 362 ( 2017 ) 3. Alekseev , A. , Malkin , A. , Meinrenken , E.: Lie group valued moment maps . J. Differ. Geom . 48 ( 3 ), 445 - 495 ( 1998 ) 4. Bellamy , G. , Ginzburg , V. : Hamiltonian reduction and nearby cycles for mirabolic D-modules . Adv. Math . 269 , 71 - 161 ( 2015 ) 5. Brochier , A. , Jordan , D. : Fourier transform for quantum D-modules via the punctured torus mapping class group . Quantum Topol . 8 ( 2 ), 361 - 379 ( 2017 ) 6. Balagovic , M. , Jordan , D. : The quantum Harish-Chandra isomorphism for G L2 . arXiv: 1603 .09218 ( 2016 ) 7. Brochier , A. : A Kohno-Drinfeld theorem for the monodromy of cyclotomic KZ connections . Commun. Math. Phys. 311 , 55 - 96 ( 2012 ). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-012-1424-0 8. Brochier , A. : Cyclotomic associators and finite type invariants for tangles in the solid torus . Algebr. Geom. Topol . 13 , 3365 - 3409 ( 2013 ) 9. Bruguières , A. , Virelizier , A. : The double of a Hopf monad . arXiv preprint arXiv:0812.2443 ( 2008 ) 10. Ben-Zvi , D. , Brochier , A. , Jordan , D. : Integrating quantum groups over surfaces . J. Topology ( 2015 ) arXiv: 1501 .04652 (To appear) 11. Ben-Zvi , D. , Nadler , D. : The character theory of a complex group . arXiv preprint arXiv:0904.1247 ( 2009 ) 12. Ben-Zvi , D. , Nadler , D. : Loop spaces and representations . Duke Math. J . 162 ( 9 ), 1587 - 1619 ( 2013 ) 13. Ben-Zvi , D. , Nadler , D. : Betti geometric Langlands . In: Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics , vol. 97 .2, pp. 3 - 41 . AMS ( 2018 ) 14. Cherednik , I. : DAHA and Verlinde algebras . In: Quantum Theory and Symmetries , pp. 53 - 64 . World Scientific Publishing, Hackensack, NJ ( 2004 ) 15. Cherednik , I. : Double Affine Hecke Algebras . London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series , vol. 319 . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge ( 2005 ) 16. Chari , V. , Pressley , A. : A Guide to Quantum Groups . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge ( 1994 ) 17. Donin , J. , Kulish , P.P. , Mudrov , A.I. : On a universal solution to the reflection equation . Lett. Math. Phys . 63 ( 3 ), 179 - 194 ( 2003 ) 18. Donin , J. , Mudrov , A. : Explicit equivariant quantization on coadjoint orbits of G L(n, C) . Lett. Math. Phys . 62 ( 1 ), 17 - 32 ( 2002 ) 19. Donin , J. , Mudrov , A. : Quantum coadjoint orbits of G L(n) and generalized Verma modules . Lett. Math. Phys . 67 ( 3 ), 167 - 184 ( 2004 ) 20. Donin , J. , Mudrov , A. : Quantum groupoids and dynamical categories . J. Algebra 296 ( 2 ), 348 - 384 ( 2006 ) 21. Douglas , C.L. , Schommer-Pries , C. , Snyder , N.: Dualizable tensor categories . arXiv:1312.7188 ( 2013 ) 22. Etingof , P. , Geer , N.: Monodromy of trigonometric KZ equations . Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN 24 , 15 ( 2007 ) 23. Enriquez , B. : Quasi-reflection algebras and cyclotomic associators . Sel. Math. New Ser . 13 , 391 - 463 ( 2008 ). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00029-007-0048-2 24. Frohman , C. , Gelca , R.: Skein modules and the noncommutative torus . Trans. Am. Math. Soc . 352 ( 10 ), 4877 - 4888 ( 2000 ) 25. Finkelberg , M. , Ginzburg , V.: On mirabolic D-modules . Int. Math. Res. Not . 2010 ( 15 ), 2947 - 2986 ( 2010 ) 26. Freed , D.S. , Hopkins , M.J. , Teleman , C. : Loop groups and twisted K -theory III. Ann. Math. 174 ( 2 ), 947 - 1007 ( 2011 ) 27. Fehér , L. , Klimcˇík , C.: Self-duality of the compactified Ruijsenaars-Schneider system from quasiHamiltonian reduction . Nucl. Phys. B 860 ( 3 ), 464 - 515 ( 2012 ) 28. Fehér , L. , Klimcˇík , C. : The Ruijsenaars Self-Duality Map as a Mapping Class Symplectomorphism , pp. 423 - 437 . Springer, Tokyo ( 2013 ) 29. Fehér , L. , Kluck , T. : New compact forms of the trigonometric Ruijsenaars-Schneider system . Nucl. Phys. B 882 , 97 - 127 ( 2014 ) 30. Fock , V.V. , Rosly , A.A. : Poisson structure on moduli of flat connections on Riemann surfaces and the r -matrix . In: Moscow Seminar in Mathematical Physics , vol. 191 of Am. Math. Soc. Transl. Ser. 2 , pp. 67 - 86 . Am. Math. Soc. , Providence, RI ( 1999 ) 31. Francis , J.: The tangent complex and Hochschild cohomology of En -rings . Compos. Math. 149 ( 3 ), 430 - 480 ( 2013 ) 32. Fuchs , J. , Schaumann , G. , Schweigert , S.: A trace for bimodule categories . arXiv:1412.6968 ( 2014 ) 33. Gaitsgory , D. : Quantum Langlands correspondence . arXiv preprint arXiv:1601.05279 ( 2016 ) 34. Gan , W.L. , Ginzburg , V. : Almost-commuting variety, D-modules, and Cherednik algebras . Int. Math. Res. Pap . ( 2006 ) 35. Ginot , G.: Notes on factorization algebras, factorization homology and applications . In: Mathematical aspects of quantum field theories , pp. 429 - 552 . Springer ( 2015 ) 36. Gorsky , A. , Nekrasov , N.: Relativistic Calogero-Moser model as gauged WZW theory . Nucl. Phys. B 436 ( 3 ), 582 - 608 ( 1995 ) 37. Gunningham , S.: A generalized Springer decomposition for D-modules on a reductive Lie algebra . arXiv preprint arXiv:1510.02452 ( 2015 ) 38. Jordan , D. : Quantized multiplicative quiver varieties . Adv. Math . 250 , 420 - 466 ( 2014 ) 39. Kolb , S. , Stokman , J.: Reflection equation algebras, coideal subalgebras, and their centres . Sel . Math. 15 ( 4 ), 621 - 664 ( 2009 ) 40. Lurie , J.: Higher algebra . http://www.math.harvard.edu/~lurie/ 41. Lurie , J.: On the classification of topological field theories . Curr. Dev . Math. 2008 , 129 - 280 ( 2009 ) 42. Nevins , T. : Mirabolic Langlands duality and the quantum Calogero-Moser system . Transform. Groups 14 ( 4 ), 931 - 983 ( 2009 ) 43. Oblomkov , A. : Double affine Hecke algebras and Calogero-Moser spaces . Represent. Theory Am. Math. Soc . 8 ( 10 ), 243 - 266 ( 2004 ) 44. Ruijsenaars , S. , Schneider , H.: A new class of integrable systems and its relation to solitons . Ann. Phys. 170 ( 2 ), 370 - 405 ( 1986 ) 45. Voronov , A.A. : The Swiss-cheese operad . In: Homotopy invariant algebraic structures (Baltimore , MD , 1998 ), vol. 239 of Contemp. Math., pp. 365 - 373 . Am. Math. Soc. , Providence, RI ( 1999 ) 46. Varagnolo , M. , Vasserot , E.: Double affine Hecke algebras at roots of unity . Represent. Theory 14 , 510 - 600 ( 2010 )


This is a preview of a remote PDF: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs00029-018-0426-y.pdf

David Ben-Zvi, Adrien Brochier, David Jordan. Quantum character varieties and braided module categories, Selecta Mathematica, 2018, 1-38, DOI: 10.1007/s00029-018-0426-y