# The non-chiral fusion rules in rational conformal field theories

## Abstract

We introduce a general method in order to construct the non-chiral fusion rules which determine the operator content of the operator product algebra for rational conformal field theories. We are particularly interested in the models of the complementary $`D`$like solutions of the modular invariant partition functions with cyclic center $`Z_N`$. We find that the non-chiral fusion rules have a $`Z_N`$grading structure.

One of the most important requirements in the construction of two-dimensional conformal field theories (CFT), the bootstrap requirement, is the existence of a closed associative operator product algebra (OPA) among all fields . The information about the OPA structure is collected in the structure constants, the computation of which is fundamental since it permits in principle the determination of all correlation functions. But unfortunately, in practice, the structure of the OPA seems to be very complicated and so is, indeed, the computation of the structure constants.

The structure of the OPA is expressed by the so-called fusion rules , which describe how the chiral-sectors ‘vertices’, representing the holomorphic $`\left(z\right)`$ and antiholomorphic $`\left(\overline{z}\right)`$ dependencies of the primary fields, combine in the OPA . Although these fusion rules contain a large amount of information, this description seems to be incomplete. Indeed, for the maximally extended chiral algebras, i.e., models with no pure holomorphic primary fields, the chiral fusion rules describe completely the OPA structure since the two structures are isomorphic . But for the non-maximally extended algebras, the relationship between the two structures is still not clear and in these special cases, the chiral fusion rules describe in a ‘chiral’ half-manner only the full OPA structure .

The purpose of this letter is to propose a construction that provides a complete description of the OPA structure using the notion of the non-chiral fusion rules, first introduced in  for the $`D`$ series of the minimal $`\left(c<1\right)`$ models. The non-chiral fusion rules, in contrast to the chiral ones, determine the operator content of the operator product algebra, i.e., they determine which fields are present in the product (fusion) of two primary fields.

The first step is of course the chiral fusion rules: a non-chiral fusion coupling is vanishing if and only if the corresponding chiral fusion coupling in the two sectors vanishes. This is called the naturality statement . The second step consists in combining properly the fusion rules in the two sectors by considering the closure of the OPA so that only combinations permitted by the operator content are considered. We note that the operator content, in relation with the modular solutions of the partition function, has been completely determined for a particular class of rational conformal theories (RCFT) known as “simple current solutions” . We will henceforth specialize to this particular type of models. The third step is to show how the ”simple-current symmetry”, a symmetry of the fusion rules, manifests itself in the construction of the non-chiral fusion rules. In this letter, we restrict ourselves to the case where the current symmetry forms a cyclic group $`Z_N`$.

Let us now start our construction. The existence of a closed associative operator algebra among all fields is expressed in the following :

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐈(z,\overline{z})\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐉(w,\overline{w})=\underset{𝐊}{}C_{\mathrm{𝐈𝐉𝐊}}\left(zw\right)^{h_kh_ih_j}\left(\overline{z}\overline{w}\right)^{\overline{h}_k\overline{h}_i\overline{h}_j}\left[\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐊(w,\overline{w})+\mathrm{}\right].$$
(1)   
$`I(i,\overline{i})`$ indicates the different fields with $`i\left(\overline{i}\right)`$ representing the contributions (vertices) of the holomorphic (antiholomorphic) sectors to the primary fields. $`h_i`$ and $`\overline{h}_i`$ are the conformal dimensions of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐈`$ and the ellipsis stands for terms involving descendant fields. $`C_{\mathrm{𝐈𝐉𝐊}}`$ are the structure constants of the operator algebra. We define the non-chiral fusion rules as a formal structure which determine the operator content of the operator algebra. Thus, the fusion of the two primaries $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐈`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐉`$ produces the field $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐊`$ if and only if the structure constant $`C_{\mathrm{𝐈𝐉𝐊}}`$ in (1) is non-zero. If we adopt $`(i,\overline{i})`$ and $``$ as notations for a primary field $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐈`$ and the OPA operation respectively, the non-chiral fusion rules are formally given by:

$$(i,\overline{i})(j,\overline{j})=\underset{𝐊}{}𝒩_{\mathrm{𝐈𝐉}}^𝐊(k,\overline{k});$$

$$𝒩_{\mathrm{𝐈𝐉}}^𝐊0C_{\mathrm{𝐈𝐉𝐊}}0,$$
(2)   
Eq. (2) is similar to how the chiral fusion rules (describing an associative structure) in the two sectors are usually defined. Indeed, we usually associate with each primary field $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝐈`$ a formal object $`\left(i\right)`$ representing its chiral part and introduce a formal multiplication $``$ by:

$$\left(i\right)\left(j\right)=\underset{k}{}𝒩_{ij}^k\left(k\right),$$
(3)   
where $`𝒩_{ij}^k`$ (chiral fusion rules coefficients) counts the number of distinct ways in which $`\left(k\right)`$ occurs in the chiral fusion of the two fields $`\left(i\right)`$ and $`\left(j\right)`$ respectively . If we denote by an arrow $`()`$ the presence of $`\left(k\right)`$ in the fusion $`\left(i\right)\left(j\right)`$, the naturality statement amounts to:

$$\{\begin{array}{c}\left(i\right)\left(j\right)\left(k\right)\\ \left(\overline{i}\right)\left(\overline{j}\right)\left(\overline{k}\right)\end{array}C_{\mathrm{𝐈𝐉𝐊}}0,$$
(4)   
which means that for the non-chiral fusion rules, one must have the condition:

$$𝒩_{ij}^k0,𝒩_{\overline{i}\overline{j}}^{\overline{k}}0𝒩_{\mathrm{𝐈𝐉}}^𝐊0.$$
(5)   
As mentioned earlier on, the second step is to consider the closure of the OPA: we require the compatibility of the non-chiral fusion rules with the operator content determined by the modular constraints on partition functions. Denoting the set of the operator content of a given conformal model by $`𝒪`$, this requirement is expressed by:

$$𝒩_{\mathrm{𝐈𝐉}}^𝐊0\text{ if }𝐈,𝐉,𝐊𝒪.$$
(6)   
The third step relies, as we said, on symmetry considerations. Indeed, a symmetry of the fusion rules provided by the presence of simple currents is quite useful in the construction of a large class of modular invariant partition functions . The construction of simple currents as solutions to modular invariant partition functions reproduces the diagonal $`\left(A\right)`$-like and the non-diagonal $`\left(D\right)`$-like series of the $`SU\left(2\right)`$ Kac-Moody algebra. In the $`\left(D\right)`$ series case, it was emphasized in  that the OPA is structured following a discrete cyclic symmetry $`Z_2`$. Here we show how the analogous to this symmetry appears in more general cases as a consequence of a simple-current structure of the $`D`$-like series.

But first, a brief reminder of the structure of a simple-current symmetry. A simple current $`\left(j\right)`$ is a primary field (chiral part) for which the chiral fusion rules with $`\left(i\right)`$ give one non-vanishing fusion coefficient $`𝒩_{ji}^k`$, so that $`\left(j\right)\left(i\right)=\left(k\right)`$ . Due to the associativity of the fusion product, the fusion of two simple currents is again a simple current. Simple currents thus form an abelian group under the fusion product, called the center of the theory. Since the number of primary fields is finite in a rational theory, the number of simple currents is finite. This implies that simple currents are unipotent, i.e., there must be an integer $`N`$ so that $`j^N=1.`$ The smallest integer $`N`$ with this property is called the order of the simple current. Furthermore, by rationality, there must also be a smallest positive integer $`N_i`$ such that $`\left(j\right)^{N_i}\left(i\right)=\left(i\right)`$. By associativity, $`N_i`$ must be a divisor of $`N`$. If a simple current takes a field into itself, we call this latter a fixed point of that current. We see then that any simple current organizes the primary fields into orbits: $`\left\{\left(j^\alpha i\right);\alpha =0\mathrm{}N_i\right\}`$.

The presence of simple currents in a conformal field theory allows not only the organization of the fields into orbits but also the expression of a symmetry through a conservation of a monodromy charge $`Q\left(i\right)`$. This latter is defined modulo an integer and expresses the monodromy property of the (OPA) (1) of a primary field $`\left(i\right)`$ with a simple current $`\left(j\right)`$: $`Q\left(i\right)h_j+h_ih_{\left(ji\right)}mod1.`$ This definition imposes the monodromy charge to be additive under the operator product, i.e., $`Q\left(ik\right)=Q\left(i\right)+Q\left(k\right)`$ and it follows that all terms in the OPA of two fields must have the same charge. As a consequence, the monodromy charge must be conserved $`\left(_nQ\left(i_n\right)=Q\left(1\right)=0mod1\right)`$ in order to have a non-vanishing $`n`$-point correlation function $`i_1i_2\mathrm{}i_n`$. So, if we denote the charge associated with a simple current $`j`$ by $`Q`$, then obviously the charge associated to $`j^d`$ is equal to $`dQ`$, as usual modulo $`1`$. This implies that simple currents of order $`N`$ $`\left(j^N=1\right)`$ have a charge equal to an integer, and therefore $`Q\left(j\right)\frac{r}{N}mod1`$, $`r`$ defined modulo $`N`$.

The conservation of the monodromy charge means that the presence of simple currents in a conformal field theory implies that the center forms an abelian discrete symmetry group. This important fact is very useful in order to find solutions to a large class of modular invariant partition functions using an orbifold-like method with respect to the center. The resulting modular invariant partition functions are known as simple-current invariants. A modular invariant partition function $`\left(Z=M_{i,k}\chi _i\chi _k\right)`$ is called a simple current invariant if all fields paired non-diagonally are related by simple currents: $`M_{i,k}0`$ if $`k=ji`$. In the case where the center forms a cyclic center $`Z_N`$, i.e., there is only one orbit of simple currents $`\{1,j,j^2,\mathrm{},j^{N1}\}`$, the non-zero couplings $`M_{i,k}`$ are given by :

$$M_{i,j^ni}=\frac{N}{N_i}\delta ^1\left[Q\left(i\right)+\frac{1}{2}nQ\left(j\right)\right],$$
(7)   
where $`\delta ^1`$ is equal to one if its argument is an integer, zero otherwise. These solutions (7) can be structured as either an automorphism-invariant and integer-spin-invariant structures or a combination of these. In the first structure, the two chiral sectors $`(i,j)`$ are combined via an automorphism of fusion rules $`\pi \left(i\right)=j`$. The second structure can always be regarded as a diagonal invariant of a larger than originally considered chiral algebra . This is what happens when some current $`j^n`$ has an integer spin so that the coupling $`M_{0,j^n}`$ is different from zero and hence produces an holomorphic field corresponding to the extra currents (Noether currents) that will extend the algebra. For the cyclic center $`Z_N`$ with $`N`$ prime, one has a pure automorphism invariant for $`Q\left(j\right)0`$ or integer invariant for $`Q\left(j\right)=0`$. For the non-prime values of $`N`$, the general form of modular partition function can be a combination of the automorphism and integer-invariant solutions. In the sequel, we will exploit the operator-content structure provided by the forms of the modular-invariant partition functions for $`N`$ prime in the construction of the non-chiral fusion rules. The same conclusions will be straightforwardly applied to non-prime values of $`N`$.

We now turn to the construction of the non-chiral fusion rules. We start with the automorphism invariant cases. The fact that the two chiral sectors of a primary field are related by an automorphism of fusion rules makes the OPA structure isomorphic to the structure of the fusion rules . To see this, we first consider the operator content obtained from (7) for $`Q\left(j\right)0`$. This content can be structured in sets:

$$A_k=\left\{(j^ki,j^{Nk}i)/Q\left(i\right)=0\right\}.$$

One can see that the two sectors are related by an automorphism of fusion rules $`\pi \left(i\right)=i^c`$ where $`i^c`$ is the conjugate field of $`i`$ under the fusion operation. To construct the non-chiral fusion rules, let us consider two fields $`(j^ki,j^{Nk}i)`$ and $`(j^pi^{},j^{Np}i^{})`$ of $`A_k`$ and $`A_p`$ respectively. Due to charge conservation in the chiral fusion rules, we have:

$`\left(j^ki\right)\left(j^pi^{}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`j^{k+p}\left(ii^{}\right)j^{k+p}k,Q\left(k\right)=0;`$   
$`\left(j^{Nk}i\right)\left(j^{Np}i^{}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`j^{N\left(k+p\right)}\left(ii^{}\right)j^{N\left(k+p\right)}k,Q\left(k\right)=0.`$   
The compatibility with the operator content implies then:

$$(j^ki,j^{Nk}i)(j^pi^{},j^{Np}i^{})=\underset{k}{}(j^{p+k}\left(ii^{}\right)_k,j^{N\left(p+k\right)}\left(ii^{}\right)_k),$$
(8)   
where $`\left(ii^{}\right)_k`$ represents all fields $`k`$ which are results of a chiral fusion of $`i`$ and $`i^{}`$. In a more compact form, the non-chiral fusion rules are written as:

$$A_kA_p=A_l,l=p+kmodN.$$
(9)   
The non-chiral fusion rules have then the structure of a $`Z_N`$-grading where $`N`$ is the order of the center $`Z_N`$. This structure (8) is isomorphic to the chiral fusion rules and thus its associativity derives directly from the associativity of the fusion rules.

It is important to make here two observations related to the $`Z_N`$ structure (9). First, one can see that the set of scalar fields $`A_0`$ forms a closed sub-algebra in the OPA. Secondly, the $`Z_N`$-grading structure of the non-chiral fusion rules (9) points to the conservation of another charge (other than the monodromy charge) in the non-chiral fusion rules. Indeed, if we assign to each field in a set $`\left(A_p\right)`$ a charge $`\left(p/N\right)`$ which will be called a “distance charge”, this charge is conserved.

The above two observations are very important in the construction of the non-chiral fusion rules in the integer invariant cases where the problem is less evident. Indeed, if the automorphism structure discussed so far of the operator content allows us to have an isomorphism between the OPA and the fusion rules, this is not the situation in the integer invariant cases. Formally, the difficulties arise principally from the fact that if $`Q\left(j\right)=0`$, then the charge assigned to $`\left(j^pi\right)`$ with $`Q\left(i\right)=0`$ is also zero.

We tackle the issue in these cases starting from the modular partition functions (7) which yields the following structure of the operator content:

$$A_k=\left\{(i,j^ki)/Q\left(i\right)=0\right\},k=1\mathrm{}N.$$
(10)   
Let us now proceed naively with our algorithm as we did in the automorphism invariant cases and see what happens. From the structure of the operator content, one can easily see that it is not possible to have a nice structure as in (9). Indeed, one can see that for each $`\left(i\right)`$ with $`Q\left(i\right)=0`$, we can find $`p`$ and $`\left(k\right)`$ with $`Q\left(k\right)=0`$ such that $`j^pk=i.`$ As a consequence, in the results of the products of the ‘scalar’ fields $`A_0A_0,`$ it is possible to obtain fields from different sets (10) which are not ‘scalars’. A more serious problem comes from the presence of orbits with length $`N_iN`$ or, in other words, the presence of fixed-point fields $`\left(j\right)\left(f\right)=\left(f\right)`$. From (7), this means ($`N_i=1`$) that one has $`N`$ copies of the scalar field $`(f,f)`$ in the operator content. In the structure of the operator content (10), this multiplicity translates in that a fixed point of $`\left(j\right)`$ is also a fixed point of $`\left(j^k\right)`$, so that the fields $`(f,j^kf)A_k`$ are equal to $`(f,f)`$. In the construction of the non-chiral fusion rules, the presence of a multiplicity of a field creates a problem since we are not able to differentiate the behavior of the different copies of this field in the (OPA).

Following our early work , the existence of multiple copies ($`N`$ copies) of the same primary field $`\left\{\mathrm{\Phi }_p,p=0\mathrm{}N1\right\}`$ implies, by the principle of correspondence fields-states, that the corresponding lowest-weight state (ground state vector) is degenerate. This observation suggests the existence of a discrete symmetry $`Z_N`$ of the ground states such that:

$$Z_N\left(\mathrm{\Phi }_p\right)=e^{\frac{i2\pi p}{N}}\mathrm{\Phi }_p.$$
(11)   
Thus the symmetry $`Z_N`$ enables one to separate the contributions from the different copies of a degenerate field: we only need to impose the consistency of the non-chiral fusion rules with the action of this symmetry. But we must also determine the action of $`Z_N`$ on the other fields of the theory. In order to do this, we first use a heuristic argument, namely that the fields of the same structure (fields belonging to the same set $`A_p`$) must have the same behavior under $`Z_N`$. Observing that each copy $`\mathrm{\Phi }_p`$ of a degenerate field belongs to a set $`A_p`$, we can write that:

$$Z_N\left(\mathrm{\Phi }\right)=e^{\frac{i2\pi p}{N}}\mathrm{\Phi },\mathrm{\Phi }A_p.$$
(12)   
The action of the discrete symmetry $`Z_N`$ provides each field from $`A_p`$ with a charge equal to the distance charge $`\left(p/N\right)`$. The consistency of the non-chiral fusion rules with the $`Z_N`$ action (11, 12) implies the conservation of this charge under the fusion operation, so that finally we obtain a $`Z_N`$-grading (like in the automorphism cases) of these rules:

$$(i,j^pi)(i^{},j^p^{}i^{})=\underset{k}{}(\left(ii^{}\right)_k,j^{p+p^{}}\left(ii^{}\right)_k).$$
(13)   
In these rules, the different copies $`\mathrm{\Phi }_p`$ of a degenerate field are considered not as $`(f,f)`$ but as $`(f,j^pf)`$. One first note that the set $`A_0`$ of the ‘scalar’ fields form a sub-algebra of the OPA. By ‘scalar’ here we mean not only the spinless fields but also the single fields under the action of the symmetry $`Z_N`$. A more important remark is the associativity of (13) which is also a consequence of the isomorphism with the structure of the chiral fusion rules.

The conservation of the $`Z_N`$ charge $`p/N`$ in non-chiral fusion rules leads us to think that associating a simple-current field interpretation would provide our construction with a less heuristic argument. In the integer invariant cases, the simple current $`\left(j\right)`$ is present as a chiral part of some physical fields, namely:

$$𝐉_q^p=(j^q,j^{p+q})A_p.$$
(14)   
These fields $`𝐉_q^p`$ are indexed by two integers $`q`$ and $`p`$. Indeed, the first index $`q`$ is present in the two sectors as a power of $`j`$ and the second index, the distance $`p,`$ is present also as a power of $`j`$ but only in one sector and so represents the non-diagonal anisotropy in the coupling between the two sectors. These fields (14) form a sub-algebra of the OPA:

$$𝐉_{q_1}^{p_1}𝐉_{q_2}^{p_2}=𝐉_{q_3}^{p_3};q_3=q_1+q_2modN,p_3=p_1+p_2modN,$$
(15)   
and their action on a field $`(i,j^pi)`$ $`A_p`$ is determined by our algorithm:

$$𝐉_{q_1}^{p_1}(i,j^pi)=(k,j^{p+p_1}k)A_{\left[p+p_1modN\right]},k=j^{q_1}i.$$
(16)   
Thus, one sees that the physical fields $`𝐉_q^p`$ in (14) are the simple-current fields of the non-chiral fusion rules. From their structure, it is easily seen that these simple fields are divided into two categories. The first one is that of the scalar fields $`p=0`$. They form a sub-algebra of the current-field algebra (15) and are generated under fusion operation from $`(j,j)`$. The second category is characterized by a non-vanishing distance $`p`$ and hence is composed by the set of the non-vanishing spin fields. As a representative element of this set, one has the holomorphic (antiholomorphic) field $`(1,j)`$ ($`(j,1)`$). From (15), it is clear that the non-vanishing simple spin fields are all generated from $`(1,j)`$ and $`(j,j)`$.

As for the chiral fusion rules, the presence of simple fields implies the conservation of a charge in the non-chiral fusion rules. Indeed, the action of the simple scalar field $`(j,j)`$ (16) on a given field affects the two sectors on equal footing so that the general structure of this field does not change. Hence, the simple field $`(j,j)`$ can be seen as playing the same role as the simple current $`\left(j\right)`$ and so it expresses the conservation of the monodromy charge in the non-chiral fusion rules. This fact comes actually from imposing the naturality statement in the construction of the non-chiral fusion rules. More important is the holomorphic simple field $`(1,j)`$ since its action (16) affects only the right sector and hence allows the establishment of a correspondence between fields in different sets $`A_p`$:

$$(1,j)A_p=A_{p+1}.$$
(17)   
The holomorphic simple field $`(1,j)`$ plays the role of the generator of the distance $`p`$. In terms of orbifold partition functions , eq. (17) means that fields in “twisted sectors” $`\left\{A_{p0}\right\}`$ are generated gradually by the non-chiral fusion of the “twist field” $`(1,j)`$ on fields of the “untwisted sector” $`A_0`$. From this, we can deduce an important fact about the behavior of the degenerate fields. Indeed, by denoting each component of a degenerate field by $`\left\{\mathrm{\Phi }_p\right\}_{p=0}^{p=N1}`$ as an element of a set $`\left\{A_p\right\}_{p=0}^{p=N1}`$ , we can set from (17) that:

$$(1,j)\mathrm{\Phi }_p=\mathrm{\Phi }_{p+1}.$$
(18)   
Eq. (18) is nothing but a reinterpretation of the action of the $`Z_N`$ cyclic symmetry (11).

It is now possible to get the general structure of the non-chiral fusion rules, by establishing their $`Z_N`$-grading structure. First we start from the general form of the non-chiral fusion rules of the set of ‘scalar’ fields $`A_0`$:

$$A_0A_0=\underset{i=0}{\overset{N1}{}}B_0^iA_i,$$
(19)   
where the coefficient $`B_0^i`$ is non-vanishing if at least one field from the set $`A_i`$ appears in the non-chiral fusion of two given scalar fields. Since the scalars are self-conjugate, we must have at least $`B_0^00`$. The general structure of the non-chiral fusion rules can be deduced by using (17) as a $`Z_N`$-gradation of the scalar rules (19):

$$A_pA_q=\underset{i=0}{\overset{N1}{}}B_0^iA_{i+k},k=p+qmodN.$$
(20)   
It is important at this point to recall from eq. (18) that each component $`\mathrm{\Phi }_p`$ of a degenerate field behaves like a field of $`A_p`$ in (20). In order to complete the determination of the non-chiral fusion rules, it remains to establish the ‘scalar’ rules (19). It is important in this regard to recall the nature of the set of ‘scalar’ fields $`A_0`$: it represents the “untwisted sector” in terms of orbifolding partition functions. This sector, having an integer charge, forms a sub-algebra of the original diagonal theory from which the orbifold procedure has been performed, see . Therefore, it is natural to set that the scalar rules (19) must have the following ‘associative’ structure:

$$A_0A_0=A_0,$$

and so, finally, the non-chiral fusion rules (20) will have the desired $`Z_N`$-grading structure (13).

In conclusion, we have developed in this work a method by which we construct non-chiral fusion rules as a formal structure describing the operator content of the OPA of a CFT. We are particularly interested in the non-diagonal rational conformal models obtained from a simple-current construction of modular invariant partition functions with cyclic center $`Z_N`$. The starting point of this construction is the naturality statement from which we have imposed the consistency of the non-chiral fusion rules with the usual fusion rules in the two chiral sectors. The results of these fusion operations are then combined properly by considering the closure of the OPA and so the consistency with the operator content which was taken to be induced by simple currents. In a third step, we have used the simple current structure of the models to establish the conservation of a charge termed as distance charge. This charge is related to the anisotropy (the distance) in the coupling between the two sectors via the simple current $`j`$. If this symmetry is trivially satisfied in the automorphism-invariant cases as expected from , the situation is less trivial in the integer-invariant cases and a more careful analysis is required. For these last cases, the analysis shows the prominent role played by the holomorphic fields $`(1,j^p)`$ as simple current fields of the distance charge symmetry. This important fact reminds us of the Martinec conjuncture  which states that the original ‘chiral algebra’ symmetry is not sufficient in order to have a rational theory, and the symmetry of the full ‘set of holomorphic fields’ is needed in order to accomplish a description of it. As a result, it is checked that each field $`(i,j^pi)`$ ($`Q\left(i\right)=0`$) of the integer-invariant part of the operator content will have a distance charge equal to:

$$\frac{p}{N}+\alpha \frac{N_i}{N}\left(1\delta _{N_iN}\right)mod1,\alpha =0\mathrm{}\frac{N}{N_i}1,\text{ }p=0\mathrm{}N_i1.$$
(21)   
It is important to point out that the second contribution in the distance charge (21), present for orbits with length $`N_i`$ $`N`$, allows the differentiation between the behaviors of the $`N/N_i`$ copies of a degenerate primary field $`(i,j^pi)`$ in the OPA. As a final result of our construction and by structuring the fields following their distance charge in sets $`A_p`$, the non-chiral fusion rules have then a $`Z_N`$-grading structure.

As a final comment, we recall that the main goal of our construction of the non-chiral fusion rules is one important step towards the ultimate determination of the structure constants of the OPA, following our early work  for the minimal models. It is therefore of great importance to be able to find the structure of the non-chiral fusion rules for the more general cases of non-cyclic center $`Z_{p_1}Z_{p_2}\mathrm{}Z_{p_n}`$. This is currently under investigation.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank J. Fuchs for his interest in this work and his constructive correspondence. One of us (A.R.) would like to thank A. Abada for all his help and encouragements.