Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 6 cited by

Chaos in the butterfly cone

T0 review · 3 major / 4 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 proves a universal bound on the velocity-dependent Lyapunov exponent inside the butterfly cone.

desk verdict A genuinely new velocity-dependent refinement of the MSS bound, but its universality is conditional on a structural ansatz the paper does not derive; worth refereeing and citing with care. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.03574 v2 pith:OCBOWV3D submitted 2019-08-09 hep-th cond-mat.stat-mechcond-mat.str-elnlin.CDquant-ph

Márk Mezei , Gábor Sárosi This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thcond-mat.stat-mechcond-mat.str-elnlin.CDquant-ph
keywords velocity-dependentLyapunovexponentbutterflyconechaosboundout-of-time-ordercorrelatorSYKchainconformalReggetheoryrotatingblackholesquantum
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

The paper claims that in any local quantum system whose out-of-time-order correlator organizes along rays with a velocity-dependent Lyapunov exponent $\lambda(v)$, the growth rate inside the butterfly cone is bounded by $\lambda(v) \leq \frac{2\pi}{\beta}(1-|v|/v_B)$, where $\beta$ is the inverse temperature and $v_B$ is the butterfly speed. This generalizes the single-rate chaos bound of [2], which is recovered at $v=0$. The derivation applies the known analyticity-based chaos bound to the exponential ray ansatz, turns the result into a bound on the Legendre transform of $\lambda$, and solves the resulting differential inequality with the boundary condition that $\lambda$ vanishes at the cone edge. If the bound is right, strongly coupled systems saturate it beyond a critical velocity $v_*

What carries the argument

The central object is the velocity-dependent Lyapunov exponent $\lambda(v)$, defined by the ray ansatz $f(t,x)=1-\epsilon e^{\lambda(x/t)t}$ for the normalized OTOC inside the butterfly cone. The argument is carried by three pieces: the known chaos bound [2], $|\partial_t f|/(1-f) \leq 2\pi/\beta$, which rests on analyticity in a strip and factorization of correlators; the conversion of this bound into $|\lambda(v)-v\cdot\nabla\lambda(v)| \leq 2\pi/\beta$, a bound on the Legendre transform of $\lambda$; and the boundary condition $\lambda(v_B)=0$ at the cone edge, which turns the differential inequality into the integrated linear bound. The proof technique writes $\lambda(v)-v\lambda'(v)=a(v)$ with $|a(v)|\leq 2\pi/\beta$, solves it as $\lambda(v)=v\int_v^{v_B} du\, a(u)/u^2$, and bounds the integral by replacing $a(u)$ with its maximum. Saturation above $v_*$ is mediated by a pole in the mode integral, interpreted through the ladder identity of [9] or through the stress tensor pole in conformal Regge theory.

What would settle it

Numerically compute the OTOC for a local, translation-invariant spin chain with a clear separation of time scales, extract $\lambda(v)$ by fitting $\log(1-f(t,vt))$ against $t$ at fixed rays inside the cone, and look for any ray with $0<|v|<v_B$ where $\lambda(v)>\frac{2\pi}{\beta}(1-|v|/v_B)$. One such data point, with error bars below the gap to the bound, would falsify the central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Starting from the normalized out-of-time-order four-point function $f(t,x)$ and the ray ansatz $f(t,x)=1-\epsilon e^{\lambda(x/t)t}$ inside the butterfly cone, the paper derives the universal inequality $\lambda(v) \leq \frac{2\pi}{\beta}(1-|v|/v_B)$. The known bound $|\partial_t f|/(1-f) \leq 2\pi/\beta$ becomes the Legendre-transform bound $|\lambda(v)-v\cdot\nabla\lambda(v)| \leq 2\pi/\beta$; in the isotropic case this differential inequality, together with $\lambda(v_B)=0$, integrates to the stated linear bound. The paper identifies a critical velocity $v_* < v_B$ above which the bound is saturated in SYK chains, two-dimensional SYK-like CFTs, the chiral SYK model, and holographic gauge theories with stringy corrections, and explains saturation as an exchange of dominance between a saddle point and a pole in the integral defining the OTOC. In conformal Regge theory the critical velocity is the inverse slope of the leading large-$N$ Regge trajectory at the stress tensor, and the velocity-dependent Lyapunov exponent interpolates between the Regge and light-cone limits. For rotating black holes in three-dimensional anti-de Sitter space, the growing part of the OTOC is a periodic modulation on top of an exponential with average Lyapunov exponent $2\pi/\beta$, so the previously claimed violation of the bound disappears once the periodicity of the shockwave profile is taken into account.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that, inside the butterfly cone, the normalized OTOC actually takes the ray form $f=1-\epsilon e^{\lambda(x/t)t}$ with only subexponential corrections throughout the Lyapunov regime; if a local system's growing region broadens rather than organizing into smooth rays, the derived bound does not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At every velocity inside the butterfly cone, the growth rate is no larger than $\frac{2\pi}{\beta}(1-|v|/v_B)$, so the bound and the definition of the cone edge are mutually consistent.
  • Boosting a probe, or working in a boosted thermal ensemble, cannot exceed the faster of the two chiral rates: $\lambda_L \leq \min\{2\pi/\beta_+, 2\pi/\beta_-\}$, with saturation when the critical velocity is crossed.
  • The local scrambling time satisfies $t_{\rm scr}(x) \geq \frac{\beta}{2\pi}\log(1/\epsilon)+|x|/v_B$, so the boundary of the scrambling region is a cone only when chaos is maximal at all velocities; otherwise the tip is smoothed out.
  • In large-$N$ CFTs, the critical velocity is the inverse slope of the leading Regge trajectory at the stress tensor; in planar $N=4$ SYM it equals $1/\alpha_1(\lambda)$ for the planar coupling, and the ballistic maximal-chaos front appears for coupling above about 37.74.
  • For rotating black holes, the average Lyapunov exponent is exactly $2\pi/\beta$ and the instantaneous version of the bound can be violated only after times that scale with the system size; in the decompactified limit the VDLE obeys the boosted bound.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper, the same Legendre-transform structure suggests a universal statement about front shapes: if a system's $\lambda(v)$ is smooth and concave, the butterfly front should be linearly sharp where the bound is saturated and rounded below $v_*$, a signature directly measurable in cold-atom or trapped-ion simulations of operator spreading.
  • Beyond the paper, because the argument uses only the ray ansatz and the analyticity bound, it should also constrain classical and semiclassical chaotic systems with a local growth rate; testing the inequality with classical spin-chain numerics would show whether the bound is specifically quantum or a general feature of local chaos.
  • Beyond the paper, the saddle-pole exchange suggests that the subexponential prefactor $\epsilon(t,x)$ carries the signature of saturation: near $v_*$ the prefactor should show crossover behavior, which an exponential-only analysis cannot resolve.
  • Beyond the paper, a local system with a strongly broadened or non-differentiable front would escape this bound, marking the boundary of the ray-ansatz regime and motivating a refined bound involving the front width.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper derives an upper bound on the velocity-dependent Lyapunov exponent lambda(v) inside the butterfly cone, lambda(v) <= (2*pi/beta)(1 - |v|/v_B), by applying the Maldacena-Shenker-Stanford chaos bound to a ray-ansatz form for the out-of-time-ordered correlator. The derivation starts from a proposed form f(t,x) = 1 - epsilon e^{lambda(x/t)t}, converts the MSS bound into a bound on the Legendre transform of lambda(v), and then integrates the resulting differential inequality subject to lambda(v_B)=0. The paper also generalizes the bound to anisotropic butterfly cones, analyzes SYK chains, MSW models, chiral SYK models, stringy corrections in holography, and conformal Regge theory, and re-examines chaos bounds for boosted and rotating ensembles in Section 5.

Significance. If the result holds in the stated generality, it is a valuable refinement of the MSS chaos bound: it upgrades a single Lyapunov exponent to a velocity-resolved bound that is saturated in a broad class of strongly coupled systems, and it gives a concrete meaning to 'maximal chaos along rays' with a sharp critical velocity v*. The derivation in Section 2 is clean, parameter-free, and directly follows from the MSS bound combined with the ray ansatz; the examples are taken from the literature and the saturation of the bound is demonstrated by independent saddle/pole calculations. The connection to conformal Regge theory (Section 4) is a useful bridge between chaos and the analytic structure of large-N CFT correlators, and the rotating-ensemble analysis in Section 5 clarifies previous conflicting claims about rotating BTZ black holes. The paper is transparent about several assumptions, but the central claim is conditional on the unproven ray-ansatz structure, which limits the universality of the abstract's statement.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2.2, Eq. (1.5) and Eq. (1.8)] The bound (1.8) is obtained by substituting the ray ansatz f(t,x) = 1 - epsilon e^{lambda(x/t)t} into the fixed-x MSS bound (1.6), which yields a bound on the Legendre transform lambda(v) - v·grad lambda(v). The ansatz is proposed in the Introduction as 'it seems natural to propose' and is not derived from microscopic dynamics. If a local system's OTOC does not organize into smooth exponential rays—for example, if the front is broadened or diffusive, lambda(v) is not differentiable, or multiple saddles contribute—then partial_t f/(1-f) is not equal to lambda(v) - v·grad lambda(v), and Eq. (1.8) does not follow. Since this is exactly the central claim advertised in the abstract, the paper should either derive the ansatz under stated conditions or explicitly frame the result as conditional on the ray structure and adjust the abstract and introduction accordingly.
  2. [§4.2, near Eq. (4.22)] The Regge-theoretic justification of the ansatz for large-N CFTs is itself conditional: it assumes the leading Regge pole dominates the integral (4.14) and explicitly assumes the convexity of the large-N Regge trajectory j(-ir), a property that the paper states has not been proven for the large-N trajectory. The text near Eq. (4.22) acknowledges this, but the Introduction and Abstract present the result as a universal bound for local systems. The dependence of the Section 4 analysis on the unproven convexity assumption should be flagged in the summary of results, not only in the technical section.
  3. [§2.3, Eq. (2.12)] The anisotropic generalization in Eq. (2.12) is presented as an 'ideal bound' because the extremal function lambda_max(v) defined in Eq. (2.13) saturates the Legendre-transform bound (1.7) for all v. This is verified locally, but the definition of v±_B(v) via intersection of a half-line with the butterfly cone assumes that the zero set of lambda is a well-defined closed cone with no reentrant structure. The paper does not discuss what happens if the butterfly cone is not star-shaped or if lambda(v) has non-monotonic behavior along a ray. This is a minor gap for the generality of the anisotropic statement, though it does not affect the isotropic bound.
minor comments (4)
  1. [General / Abstract] The abstract states the bound as 'lambda(v) <= 2*pi*T(1-|v|/v_B)' without mentioning that this presumes the ray-ansatz definition of lambda(v). A one-sentence caveat in the abstract would make the scope of the result clear to a reader who does not go through the derivation.
  2. [§4.2, Eq. (4.26) and surrounding text] The string 'lambda'’t Hooft' appears with an apostrophe that is likely a LaTeX artifact; it should be written as lambda_{'t Hooft} or similar. This is a presentational issue that should be cleaned up.
  3. [§3.4] In the chiral SYK discussion, the text says 'there is both a lower and an upper critical velocity v±_* such that for v < v_-_* and v > v_+_* , the VDLE is ballistic.' Given the formulas v±_* = (2-2J^2)/(2∓J) and v±_B = 1±J, it would be helpful to state explicitly which of the two critical velocities is negative or positive for J in [0,1], as this affects the reader's picture of the asymmetric cone.
  4. [§5.2, after Eq. (5.18)] The statement that 'on average, the Lyapunov exponent is lambda_L = 2*pi/beta' would benefit from a precise definition of the averaging procedure; the period of the modulation is stated but the average over one period is not explicitly computed in the text.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the VDLE bound follows from the external MSS bound plus an explicitly stated ray ansatz; examples are independently computed and nothing is fitted.

full rationale

The paper's central bound (1.8) is derived in Sec. 2.2 by substituting the explicitly stated ray ansatz f=1-epsilon exp[lambda(x/t)t] (Eq. 1.5) into the external MSS bound (1.6), yielding |lambda(v)-v·grad lambda(v)| <= 2 pi/beta (Eq. 1.7), and then solving the resulting differential inequality with the defining boundary condition lambda(v_B)=0. This is a conditional mathematical consequence, not a tautology: lambda(v) is not fitted to the examples, the examples independently evaluate integrals of the form (3.1), (3.5), (3.10), and (3.16), and no parameter in the bound is adjusted to match them. The only assumptions are the ray ansatz, which the paper presents as a proposal rather than a derived theorem, and the external MSS bound; conditional on those, the derivation is self-contained. The citations to the first author's prior work (refs. [23] and [33]) are limited to a proof technique and a side remark about higher-derivative corrections, and are not load-bearing for the universal bound. No fitted input is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness conclusion is imported from the authors' own prior work.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central bound rests on the MSS analyticity/factorization assumptions plus the VDLE ray ansatz. No free parameters are fitted to data. The Regge section adds an unproven convexity assumption for the large N trajectory. No invented entities are introduced.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The OTOC obeys the ray-scaling ansatz f(t,x)=1-ε e^{λ(x/t)t} with subexponential ε in the Lyapunov regime (Eq. (1.5)).
    Load-bearing for the definition of λ(v) and for converting the MSS bound into Eq. (1.7). The authors call it natural but do not derive it from microscopic dynamics.
  • domain assumption The MSS analyticity and factorization conditions: f is analytic in the strip |Im t|≤β/4, real on the real axis, and |f|≤1 on the half-strip after local thermalization.
    Standard for unitary theories with large N or a classical limit; cited from ref. [2] and reviewed in Section 2.1.
  • domain assumption λ(v) is differentiable in the butterfly cone and the butterfly velocity v_B satisfies λ(v_B)=0.
    Needed to integrate Eq. (2.4) to Eq. (2.5). This may fail for strongly broadened or non-ballistic fronts.
  • domain assumption The large N Regge trajectory j(ν) is analytic, even, and convex along imaginary ν; convexity is explicitly stated as unproven.
    Used for the bounds (4.22)-(4.25) and the claim that v_* reaches v_B before the Lyapunov exponent vanishes in d>2. The paper acknowledges this is not proven for the large N trajectory.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Chaos in the butterfly cone." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OCBOWV3D

@misc{pith2026190803574,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Chaos in the butterfly cone},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OCBOWV3D}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.03574}
}
abstract

A simple probe of chaos and operator growth in many-body quantum systems is the out of time ordered four point function. In a large class of local systems, the effects of chaos in this correlator build up exponentially fast inside the so called butterfly cone. It has been previously observed that the growth of these effects is organized along rays and can be characterized by a velocity dependent Lyapunov exponent, $\lambda({\bf v})$. We show that this exponent is bounded inside the butterfly cone as $\lambda({\bf v})\leq 2\pi T(1-|{\bf v}|/v_B)$, where $T$ is the temperature and $v_B$ is the butterfly speed. This result generalizes the chaos bound of Maldacena, Shenker and Stanford. We study $\lambda({\bf v})$ in some examples such as two dimensional SYK models and holographic gauge theories, and observe that in these systems the bound gets saturated at some critical velocity $v_*<v_B$. In this sense, boosting a system enhances chaos. We discuss the connection to conformal Regge theory, where $\lambda({\bf v})$ is related to the spin of the leading large $N$ Regge trajectory, and controls the four point function in an interpolating regime between the Regge and the light cone limit. Finally, we comment on the generalization of the chaos bound to boosted and rotating ensembles and clarify some recent results on this in the literature.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 6 Pith papers

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

  1. Probing Stringy Horizons with Pole-Skipping in Non-Maximal Chaotic Systems

    hep-th 2025-12 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Pole-skipping points in non-maximally chaotic systems form Regge-like trajectories whose leading curve encodes the quantum Lyapunov exponent.

  2. Cosmological pole-skipping, shock waves and quantum chaotic dynamics of de Sitter horizons

    hep-th 2025-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Pole-skipping in Schwarzschild-de Sitter predicts superluminal and imaginary butterfly velocities, confirmed by shock wave analysis, hinting at nonlocal and non-Hermitian dual dynamics.

  3. Superluminal chaos after a quantum quench

    hep-th 2019-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    In BTZ-Vaidya holographic quenches, out-of-time-order correlators imply a transient superluminal butterfly velocity v_B = r_+/r_- > 1 while Lyapunov growth saturates the chaos bounds set by the local temperatures.

  4. Butterfly effect and $\textrm{T}\overline{\textrm{T}}$-deformation

    hep-th 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    For T\bar{T}-deformed BTZ black holes, the butterfly velocity is v_B = sqrt(1 - 8π² μ/β²), exceeding the Mezei-Stanford bound for μ<0 while the Lyapunov exponent stays at the maximal value 2π/β.

  5. Global Symmetry and Maximal Chaos

    hep-th 2019-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    For arbitrary-high-charge operators in a system with a global symmetry and chemical potential, the chaos bound weakens to 2πT/(1-|μ/μ_c|), where μ_c is the critical chemical potential.

  6. A Dynamical Systems Framework for Reinforcement Learning Safety and Robustness Verification

    cs.AI 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    The claimed RL safety verification framework is absent from the manuscript; the body text is an unrelated high-energy physics paper about de Sitter horizon chaos.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages · cited by 6 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Quasiclassical method in the theory of superconductivity,

    A. Larkin and Y. N. Ovchinnikov, “Quasiclassical method in the theory of superconductivity,” Sov Phys JETP 28 no. 6, (1969) 1200–1205

    work page 1969

  2. [2]

    A bound on chaos,

    J. Maldacena, S. H. Shenker, and D. Stanford, “A bound on chaos,” JHEP 08 (2016) 106, arXiv:1503.01409 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2016

  3. [3]

    Accessing scrambling using matrix product operators,

    S. Xu and B. Swingle, “Accessing scrambling using matrix product operators,” arXiv:1802.00801 [quant-ph]

    arXiv

  4. [4]

    Velocity-dependent Lyapunov exponents in many-body quantum, semiclassical, and classical chaos,

    V. Khemani, D. A. Huse, and A. Nahum, “Velocity-dependent Lyapunov exponents in many-body quantum, semiclassical, and classical chaos,” Phys. Rev. B98 no. 14, (2018) 144304, arXiv:1803.05902 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    arXiv 2018

  5. [5]

    Local criticality, diffusion and chaos in generalized Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev models,

    Y. Gu, X.-L. Qi, and D. Stanford, “Local criticality, diffusion and chaos in generalized Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev models,” JHEP 05 (2017) 125, arXiv:1609.07832 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2017

  6. [6]

    More on Supersymmetric and 2d Analogs of the SYK Model,

    J. Murugan, D. Stanford, and E. Witten, “More on Supersymmetric and 2d Analogs of the SYK Model,” JHEP 08 (2017) 146, arXiv:1706.05362 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2017

  7. [7]

    N = (0, 2) SYK, Chaos and Higher-Spins,

    C. Peng, “N = (0, 2) SYK, Chaos and Higher-Spins,” JHEP 12 (2018) 065, arXiv:1805.09325 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2018

  8. [8]

    The chiral SYK model,

    B. Lian, S. L. Sondhi, and Z. Yang, “The chiral SYK model,” arXiv:1906.03308 [hep-th]

    arXiv 1906

Show all 58 references
  1. [9]

    On the relation between the magnitude and exponent of OTOCs,

    Y. Gu and A. Kitaev, “On the relation between the magnitude and exponent of OTOCs,” JHEP 02 (2019) 075, arXiv:1812.00120 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Transport and chaos in lattice Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev models,

    H. Guo, Y. Gu, and S. Sachdev, “Transport and chaos in lattice Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev models,” Phys. Rev. B100 no. 4, (2019) 045140, arXiv:1904.02174 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2019 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Stringy effects in scrambling,

    S. H. Shenker and D. Stanford, “Stringy effects in scrambling,” JHEP 05 (2015) 132, arXiv:1412.6087 [hep-th]

    2015 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Many-body chaos at weak coupling,

    D. Stanford, “Many-body chaos at weak coupling,” JHEP 10 (2016) 009, arXiv:1512.07687 [hep-th]

    2016 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Microscopic model of quantum butterfly effect: out-of-time-order correlators and traveling combustion waves,

    I. L. Aleiner, L. Faoro, and L. B. Ioffe, “Microscopic model of quantum butterfly effect: out-of-time-order correlators and traveling combustion waves,” Annals Phys. 375 (2016) 378–406, arXiv:1609.01251 [cond-mat.stat-mech] . – 32 –

    2016 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Onset of many-body chaos in the O(N) model,

    D. Chowdhury and B. Swingle, “Onset of many-body chaos in the O(N) model,” Phys. Rev. D96 no. 6, (2017) 065005, arXiv:1703.02545 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2017 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Thermalization and chaos in QED 3,

    J. Steinberg and B. Swingle, “Thermalization and chaos in QED 3,” Phys. Rev. D99 no. 7, (2019) 076007, arXiv:1901.04984 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2019 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Chaos in the Fishnet,

    R. de Mello Koch, W. LiMing, H. J. R. Van Zyl, and J. P. Rodrigues, “Chaos in the Fishnet,” Phys. Lett. B793 (2019) 169–174, arXiv:1902.06409 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Scrambling time from local perturbations of the rotating BTZ black hole,

    A. ˇStikonas, “Scrambling time from local perturbations of the rotating BTZ black hole,” JHEP 02 (2019) 054, arXiv:1810.06110 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Black holes and the butterfly effect,

    S. H. Shenker and D. Stanford, “Black holes and the butterfly effect,” JHEP 03 (2014) 067, arXiv:1306.0622 [hep-th]

    2014 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Localized shocks,

    D. A. Roberts, D. Stanford, and L. Susskind, “Localized shocks,” JHEP 03 (2015) 051, arXiv:1409.8180 [hep-th]

    2015 arXiv

  12. [20]

    BTZ dynamics and chaos,

    R. R. Poojary, “BTZ dynamics and chaos,” arXiv:1812.10073 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  13. [21]

    On the Chaos Bound in Rotating Black Holes,

    V. Jahnke, K.-Y. Kim, and J. Yoon, “On the Chaos Bound in Rotating Black Holes,” JHEP 05 (2019) 037, arXiv:1903.09086 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Butterflies with rotation and charge,

    A. P. Reynolds and S. F. Ross, “Butterflies with rotation and charge,” Class. Quant. Grav. 33 no. 21, (2016) 215008, arXiv:1604.04099 [hep-th]

    2016 arXiv

  15. [23]

    On entanglement spreading from holography,

    M. Mezei, “On entanglement spreading from holography,” JHEP 05 (2017) 064, arXiv:1612.00082 [hep-th]

    2017 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Gapless spin fluid ground state in a random, quantum Heisenberg magnet,

    S. Sachdev and J. Ye, “Gapless spin fluid ground state in a random, quantum Heisenberg magnet,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 70 (1993) 3339, arXiv:cond-mat/9212030 [cond-mat]

    1993 arXiv

  17. [25]

    The Spectrum in the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev Model,

    J. Polchinski and V. Rosenhaus, “The Spectrum in the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev Model,” JHEP 04 (2016) 001, arXiv:1601.06768 [hep-th]

    2016 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Remarks on the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model,

    J. Maldacena and D. Stanford, “Remarks on the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model,” Phys. Rev. D94 no. 10, (2016) 106002, arXiv:1604.07818 [hep-th]

    2016 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Bekenstein-Hawking Entropy and Strange Metals,

    S. Sachdev, “Bekenstein-Hawking Entropy and Strange Metals,” Phys. Rev. X5 no. 4, (2015) 041025, arXiv:1506.05111 [hep-th]

    2015 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Conformal symmetry and its breaking in two dimensional Nearly Anti-de-Sitter space,

    J. Maldacena, D. Stanford, and Z. Yang, “Conformal symmetry and its breaking in two dimensional Nearly Anti-de-Sitter space,” PTEP 2016 no. 12, (2016) 12C104, arXiv:1606.01857 [hep-th]

    2016 arXiv

  21. [29]

    AdS2 holography and the SYK model,

    G. S´ arosi, “AdS2 holography and the SYK model,” PoS Modave2017 (2018) 001, arXiv:1711.08482 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  22. [30]

    An introduction to the SYK model,

    V. Rosenhaus, “An introduction to the SYK model,” arXiv:1807.03334 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  23. [31]

    A strongly correlated metal built from Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev modelsStrongly Correlated Metal Built from Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev Models,

    X.-Y. Song, C.-M. Jian, and L. Balents, “A strongly correlated metal built from Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev modelsStrongly Correlated Metal Built from Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev Models,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 no. 21, (2017) 216601, arXiv:1705.00117 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2017 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Two-dimensional conformal field theory and the butterfly effect,

    D. A. Roberts and D. Stanford, “Two-dimensional conformal field theory and the butterfly effect,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 no. 13, (2015) 131603, arXiv:1412.5123 [hep-th]

    2015 arXiv

  25. [33]

    On entanglement spreading in chaotic systems,

    M. Mezei and D. Stanford, “On entanglement spreading in chaotic systems,” JHEP 05 (2017) 065, arXiv:1608.05101 [hep-th] . – 33 –

    2017 arXiv

  26. [34]

    On the connection between hydrodynamics and quantum chaos in holographic theories with stringy corrections,

    S. Grozdanov, “On the connection between hydrodynamics and quantum chaos in holographic theories with stringy corrections,” JHEP 01 (2019) 048, arXiv:1811.09641 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  27. [35]

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

    L. Cornalba, “Eikonal methods in AdS/CFT: Regge theory and multi-reggeon exchange,” arXiv:0710.5480 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  28. [36]

    Conformal Regge theory,

    M. S. Costa, V. Goncalves, and J. Penedones, “Conformal Regge theory,” JHEP 12 (2012) 091, arXiv:1209.4355 [hep-th]

    2012 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Light-ray operators in conformal field theory,

    P. Kravchuk and D. Simmons-Duffin, “Light-ray operators in conformal field theory,” JHEP 11 (2018) 102, arXiv:1805.00098 [hep-th] . [,236(2018)]

    2018 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Scrambling in Hyperbolic Black Holes,

    Y. Ahn, V. Jahnke, H.-S. Jeong, and K.-Y. Kim, “Scrambling in Hyperbolic Black Holes,” arXiv:1907.08030 [hep-th]

    1907 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Analyticity in Spin in Conformal Theories,

    S. Caron-Huot, “Analyticity in Spin in Conformal Theories,” JHEP 09 (2017) 078, arXiv:1703.00278 [hep-th]

    2017 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Bounds for OPE coefficients on the Regge trajectory,

    M. S. Costa, T. Hansen, and J. Penedones, “Bounds for OPE coefficients on the Regge trajectory,” JHEP 10 (2017) 197, arXiv:1707.07689 [hep-th]

    2017 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Convexity and Liberation at Large Spin,

    Z. Komargodski and A. Zhiboedov, “Convexity and Liberation at Large Spin,” JHEP 11 (2013) 140, arXiv:1212.4103 [hep-th]

    2013 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Bounding the Space of Holographic CFTs with Chaos,

    E. Perlmutter, “Bounding the Space of Holographic CFTs with Chaos,” JHEP 10 (2016) 069, arXiv:1602.08272 [hep-th]

    2016 arXiv

  35. [43]

    DGLAP and BFKL equations in the N = 4 supersymmetric gauge theory,

    A. V. Kotikov and L. N. Lipatov, “DGLAP and BFKL equations in the N = 4 supersymmetric gauge theory,” Nucl. Phys. B661 (2003) 19–61, arXiv:hep-ph/0208220 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: Nucl. Phys.B685,405(2004)]

    2003 arXiv

  36. [44]

    The Pomeron and gauge/string duality,

    R. C. Brower, J. Polchinski, M. J. Strassler, and C.-I. Tan, “The Pomeron and gauge/string duality,” JHEP 12 (2007) 005, arXiv:hep-th/0603115 [hep-th]

    2007 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Strong Coupling Expansion for the Conformal Pomeron/Odderon Trajectories,

    R. C. Brower, M. S. Costa, M. Djuric, T. Raben, and C.-I. Tan, “Strong Coupling Expansion for the Conformal Pomeron/Odderon Trajectories,” JHEP 02 (2015) 104, arXiv:1409.2730 [hep-th]

    2015 arXiv

  38. [46]

    An exact slope for AdS/CFT,

    B. Basso, “An exact slope for AdS/CFT,” arXiv:1109.3154 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  39. [47]

    On the Derivation of the Exact Slope Function,

    N. Gromov, “On the Derivation of the Exact Slope Function,” JHEP 02 (2013) 055, arXiv:1205.0018 [hep-th]

    2013 arXiv

  40. [48]

    BFKL spectrum of N = 4: non-zero conformal spin,

    M. Alfimov, N. Gromov, and G. Sizov, “BFKL spectrum of N = 4: non-zero conformal spin,” JHEP 07 (2018) 181, arXiv:1802.06908 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Causality Constraints in Conformal Field Theory,

    T. Hartman, S. Jain, and S. Kundu, “Causality Constraints in Conformal Field Theory,” JHEP 05 (2016) 099, arXiv:1509.00014 [hep-th]

    2016 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Averaged Null Energy Condition from Causality,

    T. Hartman, S. Kundu, and A. Tajdini, “Averaged Null Energy Condition from Causality,” JHEP 07 (2017) 066, arXiv:1610.05308 [hep-th]

    2017 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Black holes, shock waves, and causality in the AdS / CFT correspondence,

    G. T. Horowitz and N. Itzhaki, “Black holes, shock waves, and causality in the AdS / CFT correspondence,” JHEP 02 (1999) 010, arXiv:hep-th/9901012 [hep-th]

    1999 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Nonlinear sigma model approach to many-body quantum chaos: Regularized and unregularized out-of-time-ordered correlators,

    Y. Liao and V. Galitski, “Nonlinear sigma model approach to many-body quantum chaos: Regularized and unregularized out-of-time-ordered correlators,” Phys. Rev. B98 no. 20, (2018) 205124, arXiv:1807.09799 [cond-mat.dis-nn] . – 34 –

    2018 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Regularization dependence of the OTOC. Which Lyapunov spectrum is the physical one?,

    A. Romero-Berm´ udez, K. Schalm, and V. Scopelliti, “Regularization dependence of the OTOC. Which Lyapunov spectrum is the physical one?,” JHEP 07 (2019) 107, arXiv:1903.09595 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Global Symmetry and Maximal Chaos,

    I. Halder, “Global Symmetry and Maximal Chaos,” arXiv:1908.05281 [hep-th]

    1908 arXiv

  47. [55]

    A conformal block Farey tail,

    A. Maloney, H. Maxfield, and G. S. Ng, “A conformal block Farey tail,” JHEP 06 (2017) 117, arXiv:1609.02165 [hep-th]

    2017 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Holographic Entanglement Entropy from 2d CFT: Heavy States and Local Quenches,

    C. T. Asplund, A. Bernamonti, F. Galli, and T. Hartman, “Holographic Entanglement Entropy from 2d CFT: Heavy States and Local Quenches,” JHEP 02 (2015) 171, arXiv:1410.1392 [hep-th]

    2015 arXiv

  49. [57]

    A perturbative perspective on self-supporting wormholes,

    Z. Fu, B. Grado-White, and D. Marolf, “A perturbative perspective on self-supporting wormholes,” Class. Quant. Grav. 36 no. 4, (2019) 045006, arXiv:1807.07917 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Thermodynamics of Black Holes in anti-De Sitter Space,

    S. W. Hawking and D. N. Page, “Thermodynamics of Black Holes in anti-De Sitter Space,” Commun. Math. Phys. 87 (1983) 577. – 35 –

    1983

Pith tools

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