Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 2 cited by

On the Regge limit of Fishnet correlators

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper derives exact Regge trajectories for the 0- and 1-magnon fishnet correlators and perturbative trajectories for the 2-magnon correlator.

desk verdict The 1-magnon Regge trajectories are the real news and are probably right, but the Mellin amplitudes rest on an unproved real-t assumption that a revision should confront. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.01123 v3 pith:DIOUSVTN submitted 2019-08-03 hep-th

Subham Dutta Chowdhury , Parthiv Haldar , Kallol Sen This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-th PACS 11.25.Hf11.55.Jy
keywords fishnetCFTReggelimitMellinamplitudesconformaltheorymagnoncorrelatorsintegrabilitySommerfeld-Watsontransformtrajectories
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper claims that in the four-dimensional conformal fishnet theory, the Regge trajectories of the 0- and 1-magnon correlators can be written down exactly as functions of the coupling, and that the corresponding Mellin amplitudes can then be evaluated in the weak- and strong-coupling limits. For the 2-magnon correlator, the claim is that only perturbative control is available, with separate expansions in different regions of the spectral parameter $\nu$. The interest is that exact Regge data in an interacting conformal field theory is rare, and the fishnet theory's integrability makes these trajectories fully determined rather than asymptotic. If correct, these results give a concrete window into the high-energy behavior of a non-unitary CFT.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the Mellin amplitude in the principal-series representation, combined with the Sommerfeld-Watson transform that trades the spin sum for a contour integral in $J$. The spectral weight $b_J(\nu^2)$ is known exactly from fishnet integrability, and the Regge trajectories are the zeros of the denominator $1 - \chi_n E^{(n)}_{\Delta,J}$ after setting $\Delta = 2 + i\nu$; for 0-magnon this denominator is $(J^2+\nu^2)((J+2)^2+\nu^2) - 4f^4$. The poles of the spectral function select the trajectories, and the remaining $\nu$ integral is reduced to the finite interval $|\nu| < f^2$ (or $|\nu| < g$) by a contour rotation that the paper argues discards only $O(s^{-1})$ tails. This machinery converts exact correlators into explicit Regge-limit Mellin amplitudes.

What would settle it

Evaluate the full $\nu$ integral (4.6) numerically for real $t$ and finite $f$ without truncating to $|\nu|<f^2$, and compare with (4.8); if tail contributions fail to vanish or the Gamma products develop complex phases after Wick rotation, the finite-interval reduction is false. Equivalently, check whether the Regge poles $J(\nu)$ cross the Sommerfeld-Watson contour before the strong-coupling regime.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the Regge pole locations of the Mellin amplitudes are fixed by the poles of the exactly known spectral function, so the trajectories are exact functions of the coupling. For the 0-magnon correlator the paper obtains $J^\pm_2(\nu) = -1 + \sqrt{1-\nu^2} \pm 2\sqrt{f^4-\nu^2}$ (leading trajectory $J^+_2$) and $J^\pm_4(\nu) = -1 - \sqrt{1-\nu^2} \pm 2\sqrt{f^4-\nu^2}$. For the 1-magnon correlator it obtains $J^\pm_e = -1 \pm \sqrt{g^2-\nu^2}$ for even spin and $J^\pm_o = -1 \pm i\sqrt{g^2+\nu^2}$ for odd spin. For the 2-magnon correlator no all-coupling closed form is found; instead the paper derives weak-coupling expansions in two $\nu$ regimes and a strong-coupling expansion in powers of $1/\xi$. The resulting Regge-limit Mellin amplitudes are evaluated at weak coupling in terms of Bessel and Struve functions, and at strong coupling as power laws with trigonometric prefactors.

Load-bearing premise

The reduction to the finite $\nu$ interval assumes the physical spectrum of $t$ consists of real values only, so products $\Gamma(p+iq)\Gamma(p-iq)$ are real and the Wick-rotated tail integrals vanish; if $t$ can take complex values, or if the Regge poles migrate to the wrong half-plane at finite coupling, the simplified integrals (4.8) and (5.8) are not justified.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The 0-, 1-, and 2-magnon leading intercepts at weak coupling are 0, -1, and -2, matching the non-unitary exchanges expected from fishnet theory.
  • Strong-coupling amplitudes carry factors $\csc(\sqrt{2}\pi f)$ and $\csc(\pi g)$, so the Regge amplitudes develop periodic singularities in the coupling; these are explicit predictions for where the saddle-point approximation breaks down.
  • The 2-magnon analysis shows two distinct weak-coupling regimes separated at $|\nu| \sim \xi^4$, with different analytic forms for the trajectory; this is a level-crossing structure that a full all-coupling solution would have to reproduce.
  • The finite-interval reduction means the entire leading Regge amplitude in the weak-coupling limit is controlled by a one-dimensional integral with explicitly known Bessel and Struve kernels, allowing systematic higher-order corrections.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Extension: if the exact trajectories hold, they provide a benchmark for numerical bootstrap studies of fishnet-type CFTs, since Regge intercepts are sensitive to the full spectrum.
  • Extension: the same machinery applies to any integrable CFT with an exactly known spectral function; the input needed is only the denominator $1-\chi E(\nu,J)$ of the graph-building operator.
  • Extension: the t-dependent discrepancy between Mellin-space and momentum-space results suggests a subtraction dictionary involving $\psi^{(n)}(1-t/2)$ terms, which could be tested on the 1- and 2-magnon correlators.
  • Extension: evaluating the exact $\nu$ integral numerically at intermediate coupling would test whether $J^+_2(\nu)$ remains the leading Regge pole for all couplings or whether another trajectory crosses it.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper studies the Regge limit of Mellin amplitudes for 0-, 1-, and 2-magnon four-point correlators of the bi-scalar fishnet CFT. Using the conformal Regge theory framework of Costa-Goncalves-Penedones and the exact spectral functions of fishnet correlators, the authors solve the pole equations for the Regge trajectories. For the 0-magnon correlator the trajectories are J±2,4 = -1 ± sqrt(1-ν²) ± 2 sqrt(f⁴-ν²), and for the 1-magnon even- and odd-spin cases they are -1 ± sqrt(g²-ν²) and -1 ± i sqrt(g²+ν²), respectively. The authors then evaluate the ν integral by reducing it to finite intervals, obtaining weak- and strong-coupling Mellin amplitudes. For the 2-magnon correlator they present separate weak- and strong-coupling perturbative expansions. The 0-magnon result is compared with Korchemsky's momentum-space computation, with agreement claimed only after removing certain t-dependent polygamma terms by a conjectural prescription.

Significance. The exact, coupling-dependent Regge trajectories for the 0- and 1-magnon correlators are the strongest contribution of the paper: they follow from algebraic pole solving of spectral functions taken from prior independent work, with no free parameters, and they predict explicit s^{J(ν)} power laws. The extension to 1- and 2-magnon operators, for which LSZ reduction is not available, is a valuable exploitation of Mellin-space conformal Regge theory. The 2-magnon expansions, although perturbative, organize a non-trivial spectral function and expose an interesting scale splitting in ν. However, the Mellin-amplitude results are conditional on unproved contour manipulations in Appendix A and on a conjectural comparison prescription in Section 4.2.1, so the significance of the amplitude computations is not yet fully established.

major comments (4)
  1. [Appendix A.1/A.2; Eqs. (4.8), (5.8)] The reduction of the ν-integral to the finite intervals |ν|≤f² and |ν|≤g relies on the assertion that 'the physical spectrum of t consists of real values only' (Appendix A.1 before Eq. (A.16), and Appendix A.2 before Eq. (A.29)). This assertion is not proved. Fishnet theory is non-unitary, and the paper itself finds negative and even imaginary Regge intercepts, so complex t-channel operator dimensions are a priori allowed. If any t-channel dimension has non-zero imaginary part, the products Γ(p+iq)Γ(p−iq) are not real, the tail integrals over [f²,∞) and [g,∞) do not obviously vanish after the Wick rotation, and the simplified amplitudes (4.13), (5.15), (5.20), (5.35), and (5.40) are not justified. Because these Mellin amplitudes are a central claimed result, this is a load-bearing gap. The authors should either prove the reality of the relevant physical t spectrum or clearly reformulate the amplitude results as conditional on that assumption.
  2. [Appendix A.1/A.2; Eqs. (A.12), (A.23)] The lower-half-plane pole residues are discarded as O(s^{-1}) contributions, with the statement that this holds 'unanimously in the weak coupling regime' (Appendix A.1). No proof or quantitative bound is given. For the 0-magnon case the trajectories J±2 have complex values for |ν|>f² and grow with f², so the accompanying Γ-functions and sin(πJ) factors can in principle produce residues whose s-dependence is not uniformly subleading. This point also affects the 1-magnon reductions in Appendix A.2. Since the same residue discarding is used to derive (4.8) and (5.8), the weak-coupling Mellin amplitudes inherit this gap. The manuscript needs either a controlled estimate of the discarded residue sums or a demonstration that they are subleading in the precise limits taken.
  3. [Section 4.2.1; Eqs. (4.12), (4.13)] The claimed match of the 0-magnon Mellin amplitude with the momentum-space result of [3] requires discarding all terms proportional to (ψ^{(n)}(1−t/2))^m and also changing the ν-normalization convention. The discarding is presented as a conjecture with 'no deeper understanding' (Section 4.2.1). This means the comparison with [3] is not an independent confirmation of (4.13); rather, it is a conditional statement that (4.13) reduces to the known result after a non-derivative subtraction. Because the t-dependent polygamma terms are essential parts of the Mellin-space integrand, the status of (4.13) as the Regge Mellin amplitude is not fully under control. The authors should either derive the subtraction prescription or explicitly frame (4.13) as a Mellin-space result that differs from the momentum-space amplitude by those terms.
  4. [Section 6.1.2 and Section 6.2.3; Eqs. (1.21), (1.23)] The 2-magnon results rely on two unproven perturbative assumptions: the ansatz J = Σ a_n ξ^{4n/3} in the regime |ν|≤ξ⁴ (Section 6.1.2), justified only by an observation at ν=0, and the strong-coupling statement that the ν-integral is dominated by ν=0 while 'neglecting the effect of the poles' (Section 6.2.3). No error estimates or checks from independent regimes are provided. Since the displayed Mellin amplitudes (1.21) and (1.23) are central outputs of Section 6, these assumptions are load-bearing, even though the section is explicitly perturbative. The authors should state the expected size of the neglected terms or verify the ansatz by a consistency condition such as matching the two perturbative branches at |ν|∼ξ⁴.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 2] There is a typo: 'Bethe-Salpater' should be 'Bethe-Salpeter'.
  2. [Eq. (5.1)] The expression contains the typographical artifact 'Γ(J1iν+1 2)' which should presumably be Γ((J+iν+1)/2); please correct it.
  3. [Eq. (1.12) and Section 4.2] The notation LLL for the modified Struve function is used in the main results before it is defined in Appendix B. Please define it at first use.
  4. [Figure 2] The horizontal axis is labeled 'iν', which is confusing because ν is the real integration variable in the text. Please relabel the axis (e.g., as ν) or explain the intended variable.
  5. [References] Reference [9] is a duplicate of reference [2]; the same title is listed twice, which makes it harder to attribute the 0-magnon trajectory result.
  6. [Section 5.2.1] The text refers to 'we can write (4.47) as', but no Eq. (4.47) exists in Section 4; the intended cross-reference appears to be to Eq. (5.27).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the exact Regge trajectories are obtained by algebraic pole solving of prior exact spectral functions, and the quoted assumptions (real-t spectrum, discarding ψ terms) are correctness limitations rather than circular reductions.

full rationale

No significant circularity. The central results — the exact Regge trajectories (4.4) and (1.14) — are obtained by algebraically solving the pole equations (4.3) and (5.3) for the exact spectral functions taken from [2,7,8]; no parameter of the final amplitude is fitted from the quantity being predicted, and none of the load-bearing citations (Costa–Goncalves–Penedones, Gromov–Kazakov–Korchemsky, Korchemsky) overlap with the author list of this paper. The reduction of the ν integrals to the finite intervals |ν| < f^2 and |ν| < g in (4.8) and (5.8) does rest on an unproved premise stated in Appendices A.1/A.2 — that the physical t spectrum is real, so products Γ(p+iq)Γ(p−iq) are real and the Wick-rotated tail integrals vanish — and §4.2.1 explicitly leaves as a conjecture the discarding of terms ∝ ψ^(n)(1−t/2) to match [3]. These are unproved assumptions and correctness risks, not circular reductions: the quoted identities are not definitionally equivalent to the results, and no fitted input is relabeled as prediction. The derivation is therefore self-contained relative to its stated inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central results rest on the exact fishnet spectral functions of [2] and the Conformal Regge Theory framework of [7]. No free parameters are fitted; the only hand-made choices are perturbative ansatze and contour-reduction assumptions, which are listed as axioms. The a1 roots in the 2-magnon strong-coupling analysis are solutions of algebraic equations such as a1^4 - 32 = 0, not free parameters.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The graph-building operator eigenvalue decomposition (2.8)-(2.10) gives the exact correlators of the fishnet CFT.
    The paper takes the n-magnon correlators G_n from [2] as exact inputs. If these eigenvalues are not exact, all Regge trajectories and amplitudes in the paper inherit the error. Location: Section 2, eqs (2.8)-(2.10).
  • domain assumption The spectral weight b_J(nu^2) in the Mellin partial wave decomposition is given by (3.11) for the fishnet CFT.
    This identification with 1/c_2(nu,J) times (E^{(n)})^p divided by (1 - chi E^{(n)}) follows [7,8]; it converts exact correlators into Mellin amplitudes. Location: Section 3, eq (3.11).
  • domain assumption The physical spectrum of t consists of real values only, so products Gamma(p+iq)Gamma(p-iq) are real and the tail integrals vanish after Wick rotation.
    This is stated in Appendix A.1 and A.2 as a crucial observation. If t can take complex values, the reduction of the nu-integral to the finite intervals |nu| < f^2 and |nu| < g fails. Location: Appendix A.1 and A.2.
  • domain assumption Pole residues of the integrand after Wick rotation are exponentially suppressed in s and can be neglected in the Regge limit.
    Used to pass from (A.12) to (A.14) and from (A.23) to (A.26). The paper argues s^{-1-Im(y_P)} suppression for the poles, but does not verify this for all possible pole locations. Location: Appendix A.1 and A.2.
  • ad hoc to paper For the 2-magnon weak-coupling poles, the expansion J = sum a_n xi^{4n/3} is the appropriate ansatz in the regime |nu| <= xi^4.
    The authors state the ansatz is motivated by the observation that the spectral function at nu=0 admits such an expansion (footnote 13). It is not derived from an independent principle. Location: Section 6.1.2.
  • ad hoc to paper For strong coupling, the nu-integral is dominated by nu=0 and the contributions of additional poles can be neglected.
    In Section 6.2.3 the paper says this is true for all practical purposes and excludes overall factors, giving an order-of-magnitude result rather than a rigorous amplitude. Location: Section 6.2.3.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On the Regge limit of Fishnet correlators." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DIOUSVTN

@misc{pith2026190801123,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On the Regge limit of Fishnet correlators},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DIOUSVTN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.01123}
}
abstract

We study the Regge trajectories of the Mellin amplitudes of the $0-,1-$ and $2-$ magnon correlators of the Fishnet theory. Since fishnet theory is both integrable and conformal, the correlation functions are known exactly. We find that while for $0$ and $1$ magnon correlators, the Regge poles can be exactly determined as a function of coupling, $2$-magnon correlators can only be dealt with perturbatively. We evaluate the resulting Mellin amplitudes at weak coupling, while for strong coupling we do an order of magnitude calculation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.01123 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Contour for SW transform M±(s, t) = 1 2 X∞ J=0 Z dνb± J (ν 2 )γ(ν, t)γ(−ν, t)ζ(∆i , t)s J [1 ± (−1)J ] . (3.8) Next, using the Sommerfeld-Watson (SW) transform, we replace P J in terms of a complex integral along the contour−C (in fig.(1)), X J ≡ 1 2πi I C dJ πeiπJ sin πJ . (3.9) 4 In the position space, the Regge limits correspond to a specific kinematic configuration of the four operators in the Lorentzian signatu… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Leading Regge trajectories for 0 and 1 magnon correlators in the weak coupling. The chosen values [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Contour Prescription for (A.9) Now, referred to the above contour prescription, we have Z ∞ 0 x dx p x 2 + f 4 Φ−( p x 2 + f 4) = Z −i∞ 0 x dx p x 2 + f 4 Φ−( p x 2 + f 4) − 2πiX xP Res. " x p x 2 + f 4 Φ−( p x 2 + f 4) # (A.12) where {xP } are the poles of Φ−( p x 2 + f 4) in x. Observe that we have closed the contour in the lower half plane to ensure that the integral over C, which is a semi-circular arc of infini… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Contour Prescription for (A.14) half-plane , as shown in the figure, i.e, the poles with negative imaginary parts can contribute to the residue sum i.e, the poles that contribute have the generic structure, yP = <(yP ) − i=¯(yP ), =¯(yP ) > 0 (A.24) And since each pole…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Contour Integral for (C.2) And therefore we focus our attention towards doing the contour integral for which we will do pole analysis for each integrand I a m in order to take advantage of the Residue theorem, I γ dνLiν I 2 0 (ν;t) = 2πiX νP Res.[L iνI 2 0 (ν;t)]ν=νP (…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Twistor fishnets

    hep-th 2019-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Fishnet theory is recast on twistor space with an abelian gauge symmetry, yielding manifestly conformal cohomological amplitude formulae.

  2. Spontaneous Conformal Symmetry Breaking in Fishnet CFT

    hep-th 2019-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    The non-unitary fishnet CFT admits classical and quantum-protected flat vacua that spontaneously break conformal symmetry with exactly zero vacuum energy.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

28 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [3]

    G. P. Korchemsky, Exact scattering amplitudes in conformal fishnet theory , 1812.06997

    arXiv

  2. [9]

    Gromov, V

    N. Gromov, V. Kazakov and G. Korchemsky, Exact Correlation Functions in Conformal Fishnet Theory, 1808.02688

    arXiv

  3. [1]

    G¨ urdo˘ gan and V

    m. G¨ urdo˘ gan and V. Kazakov,New Integrable 4D Quantum Field Theories from Strongly Deformed PlanarN = 4 Supersymmetric Yang-Mills Theory , Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 (2016) 201602 [1512.06704]

    arXiv 2016

  4. [4]

    Regge, Introduction to complex orbital momenta , Nuovo Cim

    T. Regge, Introduction to complex orbital momenta , Nuovo Cim. 14 (1959) 951

    work page 1959

  5. [5]

    M. A. Virasoro, Alternative constructions of crossing-symmetric amplitudes with Regge behavior , Phys. Rev. 177 (1969) 2309

    work page 1969

  6. [6]

    G. P. Korchemsky, Bethe ansatz for QCD pomeron , Nucl. Phys. B443 (1995) 255 [hep-ph/9501232]

    work page Pith review arXiv 1995

  7. [7]

    M. S. Costa, V. Goncalves and J. Penedones, Conformal Regge theory, JHEP 12 (2012) 091 [1209.4355]

    arXiv 2012

  8. [8]

    Kazakov, Quantum Spectral Curve of γ-twistedN = 4 SYM theory and fishnet CFT , 1802.02160

    V. Kazakov, Quantum Spectral Curve of γ-twistedN = 4 SYM theory and fishnet CFT , 1802.02160

    arXiv

Show all 28 references
  1. [10]

    Grabner, N

    D. Grabner, N. Gromov, V. Kazakov and G. Korchemsky, Stronglyγ-DeformedN = 4 Supersymmetric Yang-Mills Theory as an Integrable Conformal Field Theory , Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 (2018) 111601 [ 1711.04786]

    2018 arXiv

  2. [11]

    Cornalba, Eikonal methods in AdS/CFT: Regge theory and multi-reggeon exchange , 0710.5480

    L. Cornalba, Eikonal methods in AdS/CFT: Regge theory and multi-reggeon exchange , 0710.5480. 44

    arXiv

  3. [12]

    Cornalba, M

    L. Cornalba, M. S. Costa and J. Penedones, Eikonal Methods in AdS/CFT: BFKL Pomeron at Weak Coupling, JHEP 06 (2008) 048 [ 0801.3002]

    2008 arXiv

  4. [13]

    Fokken, C

    J. Fokken, C. Sieg and M. Wilhelm, Non-conformality of γi-deformed N = 4 SYM theory , J. Phys. A47 (2014) 455401 [ 1308.4420]

    2014 arXiv

  5. [14]

    Sieg and M

    C. Sieg and M. Wilhelm, On a CFT limit of planar γi-deformedN = 4 SYM theory, Phys. Lett. B756 (2016) 118 [ 1602.05817]

    2016 arXiv

  6. [15]

    A. B. Zamolodchikov, ’FISHNET’ DIAGRAMS AS A COMPLETELY INTEGRABLE SYSTEM , Phys. Lett. 97B (1980) 63

    1980

  7. [16]

    Chicherin, V

    D. Chicherin, V. Kazakov, F. Loebbert, D. M¨ uller and D.-l. Zhong, Yangian Symmetry for Bi-Scalar Loop Amplitudes, JHEP 05 (2018) 003 [ 1704.01967]

    2018 arXiv

  8. [17]

    Gromov, V

    N. Gromov, V. Kazakov, G. Korchemsky, S. Negro and G. Sizov, Integrability of Conformal Fishnet Theory, JHEP 01 (2018) 095 [ 1706.04167]

    2018 arXiv

  9. [18]

    V. K. Dobrev, G. Mack, V. B. Petkova, S. G. Petrova and I. T. Todorov, Harmonic Analysis on the n-Dimensional Lorentz Group and Its Application to Conformal Quantum Field Theory , Lect. Notes Phys. 63 (1977) 1

    1977

  10. [19]

    F. A. Dolan and H. Osborn, Conformal four point functions and the operator product expansion , Nucl. Phys. B599 (2001) 459 [ hep-th/0011040]

    2001 arXiv

  11. [20]

    F. A. Dolan and H. Osborn, Conformal partial waves and the operator product expansion , Nucl. Phys. B678 (2004) 491 [ hep-th/0309180]

    2004 arXiv

  12. [21]

    F. A. Dolan and H. Osborn, Conformal Partial Waves: Further Mathematical Results , 1108.6194

    arXiv

  13. [22]

    Mack, D-independent representation of Conformal Field Theories in D dimensions via transformation to auxiliary Dual Resonance Models

    G. Mack, D-independent representation of Conformal Field Theories in D dimensions via transformation to auxiliary Dual Resonance Models. Scalar amplitudes , 0907.2407

    arXiv

  14. [23]

    G. P. Korchemsky, On level crossing in conformal field theories , JHEP 03 (2016) 212 [1512.05362]

    2016 arXiv

  15. [24]

    Kazakov and E

    V. Kazakov and E. Olivucci, Biscalar Integrable Conformal Field Theories in Any Dimension , Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 (2018) 131601 [ 1801.09844]

    2018 arXiv

  16. [25]

    Kazakov, E

    V. Kazakov, E. Olivucci and M. Preti, Generalized fishnets and exact four-point correlators in chiral CFT4, JHEP 06 (2019) 078 [ 1901.00011]

    2019 arXiv

  17. [26]

    Pittelli and M

    A. Pittelli and M. Preti, Integrable Fishnet from γ-DeformedN = 2 Quivers, 1906.03680

    1906 arXiv

  18. [27]

    Caetano, m

    J. Caetano, m. G¨ urdo˘ gan and V. Kazakov,Chiral limit of N = 4 SYM and ABJM and integrable Feynman graphs, JHEP 03 (2018) 077 [ 1612.05895]

    2018 arXiv

  19. [28]

    Gromov and A

    N. Gromov and A. Sever, Quantum Fishchain in AdS5, 1907.01001

    1907 arXiv

  20. [29]

    Gromov and A

    N. Gromov and A. Sever, The Holographic Fishchain, 1903.10508. 45

    1903 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.