A One-Loop Test of the near-AdS$_2$/near-CFT$_1$ Correspondence

Anthony M. Charles; Finn Larsen

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

A One-Loop Test of the near-AdS$_2$/near-CFT$_1$ Correspondence

T0 review · 3 major / 5 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 A direct bulk computation in JT gravity yields the one-loop partition function log Z = (3/2) log(G2 T/M_gap), matching the dual model.

desk verdict Credible first bulk one-loop derivation of the SYK log correction in JT gravity; the two hinges are the physicality of quadratic holomorphic differentials and a heuristic Riemann-Roch count. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.03575 v1 pith:OCVPXY2O submitted 2019-08-09 hep-th

Anthony M. Charles , Finn Larsen This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-th

keywords Jackiw-Teitelboimgravityone-looppartitionfunctionquadraticholomorphicdifferentialsnear-AdS2/near-CFT1correspondencetwo-dimensionaldilatonnear-extremalblackholesconformalsymmetrybreakinglogarithmicquantumcorrections

topics Quantum Gravity

open problems Quantum Gravity

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 sets out to quantize the Jackiw-Teitelboim model of two-dimensional dilaton gravity directly in the bulk and to compute its one-loop partition function around black hole backgrounds. Its central result is $\log Z\big|_{\text{one-loop}} = \frac{3}{2}\log\frac{G_2 T}{M_{\rm gap}} = -\frac{3}{2}\log\frac{\beta M_{\rm gap}}{G_2}$, the same logarithmic correction that had been derived from the one-dimensional dual model. The entire temperature-dependent logarithm comes from a single tower of discrete modes, the quadratic holomorphic differentials, which are exact zero modes in the extremal limit and are lifted by finite temperature. If correct, this gives a quantum-level test of the near-AdS$_2$/near-CFT$_1$ correspondence and explains why the logarithmic correction is universal: the contributing modes saturate the Breitenlohner-Freedman stability bound and their count is fixed by the Riemann-Roch theorem.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the infinite tower of quadratic holomorphic differentials on Euclidean AdS$_2$, defined as normalizable symmetric traceless tensor modes $H_{zz}^{(n)} = \ell^2\sqrt{n(n^2-1)/(2\pi)}\,z^{n-2}$ for $n = 2,3,\dots$. These modes are normalizable tensor deformations that arise from non-normalizable conformal Killing vectors, and they are eigenmodes of the tensor Laplacian with eigenvalue $-2/\ell^2$, so they saturate the Breitenlohner-Freedman bound. Around black holes the dilaton profile gives each mode a mass $n\sqrt{\mu a}\propto n\,T/M_{\rm gap}$, producing the large logarithm in the partition function. The surrounding machinery is a harmonic-analysis decomposition on $H^2$ that dualizes vectors and tensors to scalars plus discrete modes, making the cancellations in the continuous sector manifest and isolating the QHD contribution; zeta-function regularization converts the divergent tower sum into the coefficient $\frac{3}{2}$.

What would settle it

Recompute the one-loop determinant on the same black hole background with boundary conditions that remove the non-normalizable diffeomorphisms generating the quadratic holomorphic differentials, e.g. by imposing stronger fall-off on the metric fluctuations; if the logarithmic coefficient is no longer $-\frac{3}{2}$, the QHD identification is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that standard Euclidean quantum gravity methods suffice to compute the one-loop partition function of JT black holes, with the result $\log Z\big|_{\text{one-loop}} = \frac{3}{2}\log\frac{G_2 T}{M_{\rm gap}}$, in precise agreement with the one-loop free energy of the dual one-dimensional model. The logarithmic term is determined entirely by the quadratic holomorphic differentials: normalizable symmetric-traceless tensor modes $H_{zz}^{(n)}\propto z^{n-2}$ that are formally pure diffeomorphisms, but only by non-normalizable vector fields, so they are physical. In the extremal limit these modes have vanishing on-shell kinetic eigenvalue; the dilaton slope of the black hole background lifts them by an amount proportional to $n\,T/M_{\rm gap}$. Continuous modes cancel against ghosts, and harmonic vector modes do not contribute a log, leaving the zeta-function-regulated QHD tower as the sole source of the coefficient $\frac{3}{2}$.

Load-bearing premise

The argument's load-bearing premise is that the quadratic holomorphic differentials are physical fluctuation modes rather than gauge artifacts: if the correct boundary conditions instead counted them as pure gauge, they would cancel against ghost contributions and the $-\frac{3}{2}\log\beta$ coefficient would vanish.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The near-AdS$_2$/near-CFT$_1$ correspondence survives a one-loop precision test: the bulk partition function and the one-dimensional dual produce the same logarithmic temperature dependence.
The one-loop correction to the canonical free energy cancels in the Legendre transform to the microcanonical ensemble, so the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy formula receives no logarithmic correction at this order.
Because the count of quadratic holomorphic differentials is topological (Riemann-Roch) and their effective mass saturates the Breitenlohner-Freedman bound, the paper argues the $-\frac{3}{2}\log\beta$ coefficient is universal for near-AdS$_2$ dilaton gravities, not special to the JT action.
The bulk method also exposes a $-\frac{3}{2}\log S_0$ threshold contribution to extremal black hole entropy that the one-dimensional boundary computation does not see, connecting the one-loop test to earlier logarithmic-entropy calculations.

Reading between the lines

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

If the QHD identification is robust, the same harmonic-analysis method should be able to compute subleading $T^2$ free-energy coefficients and two-point functions in the bulk, which the paper does not address.
The paper's analogy with the Virasoro boundary-symmetry mechanism of AdS$_3$ gravity suggests the bulk QHD tower may be the image of the full reparameterization group, not just the boundary quotient; a test would be to match Virasoro primaries of the dual theory to deformations generated by the whole tower.
One could test the claimed universality by coupling the JT model to a second matter field: the paper's logic predicts the dilaton-gravity sector still contributes $-\frac{3}{2}\log\beta$, while matter introduces its own coefficient, changing the total to a different rational number.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Quick take: the paper does something genuinely new—a direct Euclidean bulk one-loop computation of JT gravity around near-extremal black holes—and it gets the SYK coefficient -3/2 log beta. The numerical result is not new and the authors say so; what's new is the method, and the identification of quadratic holomorphic differentials as the modes that generate the logarithm.

The computation is careful and mostly credible. The continuous modes cancel between physical fields and ghosts at T=0, the leading T correction to tr M^(1) vanishes by representation theory, and the discrete QHD sum gives -3/2 via zeta regularization after the dilaton slope turns on. The harmonic-vector tower does not contribute because its eigenvalues are shifted by T rather than lifted from zero. All of that is internally consistent. The paper also does real work organizing the field content: dualizing vectors and tensors to scalars up to discrete modes, and comparing Riemann-Roch on S2, the disk, and H2.

The soft spot is exactly where the stress-test note points. Everything rests on the QHDs being physical, normalizable tensor modes. If the correct quantization treats the underlying non-normalizable diffeomorphisms as large gauge transformations, the QHD integrals divide out and the -3/2 log beta disappears. The paper's argument that they are physical—normalizable modes generated by non-normalizable diffeos, analogous to Brown-Henneaux—is plausible, and it is the standard reading in this literature, but it is not airtight. The Riemann-Roch count that gives Ker P1^T = -3 is a heuristic: an infinite tower regulated to a negative number by combining the mode density with renormalized volume. That is not a rigorous counting of physical degrees of freedom. I would not call this fatal—there is a decent physical argument and the paper engages with the issue explicitly—but it is the hinge, and a referee should probe it.

Two smaller points. The O(T^2) remainder from continuous modes is asserted rather than fully computed. It cannot affect the log term, so for the paper's main claim this is minor, but it does leave the full one-loop result not quite proven. And the universality section extrapolates from the JT calculation to all near-AdS2 theories using effective-field-theory reasoning and a Riemann-Roch count that, as noted, is heuristic. Fine as a conjecture, not as a derived result.

Who this is for: people working on JT/SYK, near-extremal black hole entropy, and AdS2 holography. It deserves a serious referee despite my caveats. I would send it to review, and I would expect the referee to spend most of their time on Section 3.4 and the physicality of QHDs.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper computes the one-loop Euclidean path integral for the Jackiw-Teitelboim model around the near-extremal black hole background. The authors decompose metric, dilaton, and ghost fluctuations on H2 into continuous scalar modes plus discrete harmonic-vector and quadratic-holomorphic-differential (QHD) modes. In the free benchmark model the continuous determinants cancel exactly and leave only discrete-mode products (Sec. 3.5). In the full JT quadratic action, the authors find that the continuous modes cancel up to O(T^2) after using an SL(2,R) representation-theory argument for the vanishing of tr M^(1) (Sec. 4.3), that harmonic vector modes give no logarithmic temperature dependence, and that the QHDs, lifted by the dilaton slope, produce a zeta-regularized contribution 3/2 log T (Sec. 4.4). Identifying the renormalization scale as Lambda = M_gap/G_2 gives log Z|one-loop = 3/2 log(G_2 T/M_gap) = -3/2 log(beta M_gap/G_2), matching the SYK result (1.1). The authors also show that the corresponding logarithmic correction to the microcanonical entropy cancels against the Legendre transform (Sec. 5).

Significance. If the QHD modes are indeed physical, this is a valuable result: it derives the SYK logarithmic coefficient directly from bulk one-loop determinants, without passing through the Schwarzian boundary theory, and it identifies the contributing modes as normalizable tensor deformations generated by non-normalizable diffeomorphisms. The computation is internally consistent: the explicit mode normalizations (3.15), (3.19), the cancellation in the free model (3.28)-(3.32), the gauge-fixed quadratic action (4.8), and the representation-theory argument for tr M^(1)=0 (4.28)-(4.32) are all presented in detail, and the final coefficient follows from the stated zeta regularization. The result is also falsifiable, since a different treatment of the QHDs as gauge modes would remove the -3/2 coefficient. The main weakness is not in the algebra of the mode sums but in the physical interpretation and regularization of the infinite QHD tower.

major comments (3)

[§3.4, Eq. (3.25); §4.4, Eq. (4.42)] The central result (4.49) is entirely determined by the Gaussian integrals over the QHD modes H^(n)_zz in (4.42), and the coefficient 3/2 comes from the zeta-regularized sum over n=2,3,... in (4.46). Whether these modes belong in the path integral at all is therefore load-bearing. The argument in Sec. 3.4 is that the QHDs are normalizable tensor modes generated by non-normalizable diffeomorphisms, so they are physical rather than gauge; however, the mode count that supports this, Ker P1^T = -3 in (3.25), is obtained by multiplying the formal local density (3.24) by the renormalized volume -2*pi*l^2. This is a heuristic, not a derivation from the index theorem on a noncompact manifold with specified boundary conditions, and a negative number of zero modes is a signal that the counting needs a precise regularized definition. If the correct quantum boundary conditions instead identify the generating non-normalizable diffeomorphisms as large gauge transformations, the QHD integrals in (4.42) would be factored out and the -3/2 coefficient would vanish, contradicting (1.1). I ask the authors to provide a well-posed mode-counting argument on the regularized disk, with explicit fall-off conditions for Ker P1 and Ker P1^T, and to explain why non-normalizable diffeomorphisms are not part of the gauge group. The related treatment of the harmonic-vector modes B^(n)_zz in (4.35)-(4.41) is similarly ambiguous: they are called pure gauge yet are integrated over, so the paper should also specify the precise quotient that removes the pure-gauge part.
[§4.4, Eqs. (4.43)-(4.46)] The coefficient 3/2 is obtained by zeta-regularizing the infinite QHD product. As the authors note in Appendix A.1, the same zeta prescription is used in the SYK derivation, so the comparison is internally consistent. However, for a bulk one-loop test to be independent, the regularization should be justified from the spectral problem on H2 rather than imposed by analogy with the target result. A cutoff on the mode number n would give a cutoff-dependent coefficient for the log T term, and the zeta value 1 - zeta(0) = 3/2 is an analytic continuation, not a convergent sum. The authors should state this limitation explicitly and, ideally, derive the same coefficient from a regulator with an independent geometric meaning, such as heat-kernel or Pauli-Villars regularization adapted to the noncompact background.
[§4.3, Eqs. (4.27)-(4.33)] The conclusion that the continuous modes contribute no logarithmic terms is asserted rather than derived. The computation shows tr M^(1) = 0 in (4.32), but the partition function (4.27) then depends on tr[(M^(1))^2] and higher traces, and the matrix elements L and R in (4.20) are never evaluated. The text states that two cancellations have occurred and leaves log Z_cont = O(T^2). I do not think a pure O(T^2) power-law remainder affects the logarithmic coefficient extracted in (4.45), so this point may be repairable by a short argument; as written, however, the claim that all logarithmic terms come from the QHD sector is not fully supported.

minor comments (5)

[§2.1, abstract] The name Teitelboim is misspelled as "Teitelbom" in the abstract and in the introduction; please correct this throughout.
[§4.3, after Eq. (4.33)] The word "occured" should be "occurred".
[§4.4, Eq. (4.35)] The displayed expression for B^(n)_zz appears garbled: it contains the meaningless factor (1-|z|^2)/(1-|z|^2) and the overall form does not match the claimed normalization. Please check the formula.
[§4.4, Eq. (4.46)] After zeta regularization, the equality 1 - zeta(0) = 3/2 is exact, so the symbol "~=" or "∼" is misleading; please use an equals sign and state explicitly that zeta(0) = -1/2.
[§4.4, Eq. (4.48)] The identification of the renormalization scale Lambda = M_gap/G_2 is presented as a determination, but it is in fact a convention that fixes the dimensionless argument of the logarithm. Please clarify that the precision test fixes the coefficient of the logarithm, while the scale inside the logarithm is scheme-dependent.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the bulk one-loop computation is self-contained and does not reduce to the SYK/Schwarzian result it claims to test.

full rationale

The paper's central claim, eq. (4.49), is a one-loop partition function computed directly in the bulk: log Z|one-loop = 3/2 log(G2 T/Mgap) = -3/2 log(beta Mgap/G2). The coefficient 3/2 is obtained from an explicit mode count over quadratic holomorphic differentials (eqs. (3.19), (3.24)-(3.25), (4.36), (4.46)) combined with zeta-function regularization of the infinite mode sum, plus a determination that continuous modes contribute only O(T^2) and harmonic modes contribute no logarithmic term. The SYK result (1.1) is not used as an input anywhere in this derivation; it is quoted as the target to be matched and reviewed independently in appendix A. The identification of the renormalization scale Lambda = Mgap/G2 in (4.48) is motivated by the dilaton profile parameter sqrt(mu a) = 4G2 T/Mgap, and only fixes the argument of the logarithm, not the coefficient. The physicality of the QHDs is an assumption about boundary conditions and mode counting, flagged in the paper's own discussion (Section 3.4), but this is a correctness or robustness concern rather than a circular reduction: the paper does not define the QHD contribution in terms of the SYK answer, nor does it fit any parameter to the quantity it later calls a prediction. Self-citations appear (e.g., [25], [31], [32], [49], [54], [55]) but only for context, scale conventions, and comparisons with prior extremal-entropy results; they are not load-bearing for the derivation of the -3/2 coefficient. Therefore the paper is not circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the perturbative expansion around the near-extremal black hole background, the mode decomposition of fields on H2, and the claimed cancellations in the continuous sector. The only quantity chosen to complete the comparison with SYK is the renormalization scale Lambda = M_gap/G_2, which does not affect the logarithmic coefficient. No invented entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)

Renormalization scale Lambda = Lambda = M_gap / G_2
Identified in Section 4.4 after eq (4.47) using sqrt(mu a) = 4 G2 T / M_gap; it sets the argument of the logarithm and is needed for the precise match to the SYK scale J, but does not affect the -3/2 coefficient.

assumptions (7)

domain assumption The near-extremal, semi-classical hierarchy M_gap << T << Lambda_KK and small expansion parameter sqrt(mu a) = 4 G2 T / M_gap holds.
Section 2.3 establishes the regime in which the perturbative treatment of the dilaton background is justified.
domain assumption The Hodge decomposition and dualization on H2 capture all normalizable modes: vectors become two scalars plus harmonic vectors, tensors become two scalars plus harmonic vectors plus quadratic holomorphic differentials, with no other normalizable modes.
Section 3.3; this mode counting is load-bearing for the one-loop partition function.
domain assumption The gauge-fixed quadratic action (4.8), with harmonic gauge, two vector ghosts, and Dirichlet boundary conditions, gives the correct one-loop path integral for JT gravity.
Section 4.2; gauge choices should not affect physical results, and the chosen gauge makes the ghosts free.
ad hoc to paper The continuous-mode sector contributes no logarithmic terms; after tr M^(1)=0, the remaining determinant corrections are O(T^2).
Section 4.3, eqs (4.29)-(4.33); the vanishing of the linear term is shown via SL(2,R) representation theory, and the O(T^2) remainder is asserted by dimensional analysis.
standard math Zeta-function regularization of the divergent discrete-mode sums gives the physical logarithmic coefficient, with sum_{n=2}^infty 1 = 1 - zeta(0) = 3/2.
Section 4.4, eq (4.46); standard regulator for one-loop determinants.
domain assumption The black hole background in Euclidean global coordinates is H2 with dilaton profile (2.16), and the extremal limit is Phi = 1.
Sections 2.2 and 2.4; the whole computation is done on this background.
standard math The Plancherel measure and principal-series representations of SL(2,R) provide a complete basis for continuous modes on H2.
Section 3.2, eqs (3.5)-(3.7); taken from Camporesi-Higuchi and Kitaev.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A One-Loop Test of the near-AdS$_2$/near-CFT$_1$ Correspondence." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OCVPXY2O

@misc{pith2026190803575,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A One-Loop Test of the near-AdS$_2$/near-CFT$_1$ Correspondence},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OCVPXY2O}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.03575}
}

abstract

We analyze quantum fluctuations around black hole solutions to the Jackiw-Teitelboim model. We use harmonic analysis on Euclidean AdS$_2$ to show that the logarithmic corrections to the partition function are determined entirely by quadratic holomorphic differentials, even when conformal symmetry is broken and harmonic modes are no longer true zero modes. Our quantum-corrected partition function agrees precisely with the SYK result. We argue that our effective quantum field theory methods and results generalize to other theories of two-dimensional dilaton gravity.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

The Effects of Near-AdS$_2$ Backreaction on Matter Fields
hep-th 2025-09 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

Backreaction of near-AdS2 geometry gives a temperature correction to scalar correlators that for massive fields needs metric backreaction, matches BTZ, and corrects the standard prescription.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

J. M. Maldacena, J. Michelson, and A. Strominger, Anti-de Sitter fragmentation, JHEP 02 (1999) 011, [ hep-th/9812073]

arXiv 1999
[2]

Strominger, AdS(2) quantum gravity and string theory , JHEP 01 (1999) 007, [hep-th/9809027]

A. Strominger, AdS(2) quantum gravity and string theory , JHEP 01 (1999) 007, [hep-th/9809027]

arXiv 1999
[3]

Sachdev and J

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

arXiv 1993
[4]

Kitaev, A simple model of quantum holography ,

A. Kitaev, A simple model of quantum holography , . – 43 –

work page
[5]

Maldacena and D

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

arXiv 2016
[6]

Maldacena, D

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

arXiv 2016
[7]

Jensen, Chaos in AdS 2 Holography, Phys

K. Jensen, Chaos in AdS 2 Holography, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 (2016), no. 11 111601, [arXiv:1605.06098]

arXiv 2016
[8]

Teitelboim, Gravitation and Hamiltonian Structure in Two Space-Time Dimensions , Phys

C. Teitelboim, Gravitation and Hamiltonian Structure in Two Space-Time Dimensions , Phys. Lett. 126B (1983) 41–45

1983

Show all 59 references

[9]

Jackiw, Lower Dimensional Gravity, Nucl

R. Jackiw, Lower Dimensional Gravity, Nucl. Phys. B252 (1985) 343–356

1985
[10]

Almheiri and J

A. Almheiri and J. Polchinski, Models of AdS2 backreaction and holography, JHEP 11 (2015) 014, [ arXiv:1402.6334]

2015 arXiv
[11]

Almheiri and B

A. Almheiri and B. Kang, Conformal Symmetry Breaking and Thermodynamics of Near-Extremal Black Holes, JHEP 10 (2016) 052, [ arXiv:1606.04108]

2016 arXiv
[12]

Engelsy, T

J. Engelsy, T. G. Mertens, and H. Verlinde, An investigation of AdS 2 backreaction and holography, JHEP 07 (2016) 139, [ arXiv:1606.03438]

2016 arXiv
[13]

Grumiller, R

D. Grumiller, R. McNees, J. Salzer, C. Valcrcel, and D. Vassilevich, Menagerie of AdS 2 boundary conditions, JHEP 10 (2017) 203, [ arXiv:1708.08471]

2017 arXiv
[14]

Harlow and D

D. Harlow and D. Jaﬀeris, The Factorization Problem in Jackiw-Teitelboim Gravity , arXiv:1804.01081

arXiv
[15]

Castro, F

A. Castro, F. Larsen, and I. Papadimitriou, 5D rotating black holes and the nAdS2/nCFT1 correspondence, JHEP 10 (2018) 042, [ arXiv:1807.06988]

2018 arXiv
[16]

Stanford and E

D. Stanford and E. Witten, Fermionic Localization of the Schwarzian Theory , JHEP 10 (2017) 008, [ arXiv:1703.04612]

2017 arXiv
[17]

Kitaev and S

A. Kitaev and S. J. Suh, Statistical mechanics of a two-dimensional black hole , JHEP 05 (2019) 198, [ arXiv:1808.07032]

2019 arXiv
[18]

Yang, The Quantum Gravity Dynamics of Near Extremal Black Holes , JHEP 05 (2019) 205, [ arXiv:1809.08647]

Z. Yang, The Quantum Gravity Dynamics of Near Extremal Black Holes , JHEP 05 (2019) 205, [ arXiv:1809.08647]

2019 arXiv
[19]

P. Saad, S. H. Shenker, and D. Stanford, JT gravity as a matrix integral , arXiv:1903.11115

1903 arXiv
[20]

L. V. Iliesiu, S. S. Pufu, H. Verlinde, and Y. Wang, An exact quantization of Jackiw-Teitelboim gravity, arXiv:1905.02726

1905 arXiv
[21]

Stanford and E

D. Stanford and E. Witten, JT Gravity and the Ensembles of Random Matrix Theory , arXiv:1907.03363. – 44 –

1907 arXiv
[22]

Banerjee, R

S. Banerjee, R. K. Gupta, and A. Sen, Logarithmic Corrections to Extremal Black Hole Entropy from Quantum Entropy Function , JHEP 03 (2011) 147, [ arXiv:1005.3044]

2011 arXiv
[23]

Banerjee, R

S. Banerjee, R. K. Gupta, I. Mandal, and A. Sen, Logarithmic Corrections to N=4 and N=8 Black Hole Entropy: A One Loop Test of Quantum Gravity , JHEP 11 (2011) 143, [arXiv:1106.0080]

2011 arXiv
[24]

Sen, Logarithmic Corrections to N=2 Black Hole Entropy: An Infrared Window into the Microstates, Gen

A. Sen, Logarithmic Corrections to N=2 Black Hole Entropy: An Infrared Window into the Microstates, Gen. Rel. Grav. 44 (2012), no. 5 1207–1266, [ arXiv:1108.3842]

2012 arXiv
[25]

Keeler, F

C. Keeler, F. Larsen, and P. Lisbao, Logarithmic Corrections to N≥ 2 Black Hole Entropy, Phys. Rev. D90 (2014), no. 4 043011, [ arXiv:1404.1379]

2014 arXiv
[26]

Larsen and P

F. Larsen and P. Lisbao, Quantum Corrections to Supergravity on AdS 2×S2, Phys. Rev. D91 (2015), no. 8 084056, [ arXiv:1411.7423]

2015 arXiv
[27]

Liu and Y

J. Liu and Y. Zhou, Note on global symmetry and SYK model , JHEP 05 (2019) 099, [arXiv:1901.05666]

2019 arXiv
[28]

Sachdev, Universal low temperature theory of charged black holes with AdS 2 horizons, J

S. Sachdev, Universal low temperature theory of charged black holes with AdS 2 horizons, J. Math. Phys. 60 (2019), no. 5 052303, [ arXiv:1902.04078]

2019 arXiv
[29]

T. G. Mertens and G. J. Turiaci, Defects in Jackiw-Teitelboim Quantum Gravity , arXiv:1904.05228

1904 arXiv
[30]

Grumiller and R

D. Grumiller and R. McNees, Thermodynamics of black holes in two (and higher) dimensions, JHEP 04 (2007) 074, [ hep-th/0703230]

2007 arXiv
[31]

Larsen, A nAttractor mechanism for nAdS 2/nCFT1 holography, JHEP 04 (2019) 055, [arXiv:1806.06330]

F. Larsen, A nAttractor mechanism for nAdS 2/nCFT1 holography, JHEP 04 (2019) 055, [arXiv:1806.06330]

2019 arXiv
[32]

J. Hong, F. Larsen, and J. T. Liu, The Scales of Black Holes with nAdS 2 Geometry, arXiv:1907.08862

1907 arXiv
[33]

Preskill, P

J. Preskill, P. Schwarz, A. D. Shapere, S. Trivedi, and F. Wilczek, Limitations on the statistical description of black holes , Mod. Phys. Lett. A6 (1991) 2353–2362

1991
[34]

Castro and F

A. Castro and F. Larsen, Near Extremal Kerr Entropy from AdS(2) Quantum Gravity , JHEP 12 (2009) 037, [ arXiv:0908.1121]

2009 arXiv
[35]

Pathak, A

A. Pathak, A. P. Porfyriadis, A. Strominger, and O. Varela, Logarithmic corrections to black hole entropy from Kerr/CFT , JHEP 04 (2017) 090, [ arXiv:1612.04833]

2017 arXiv
[36]

P. G. L. Leach and G. P. Flessas, Generalisations of the Laplace-Runge-Lenz Vector, Journal of Nonlinear Mathematical Physics 10 (2003), no. 3 340–423, [https://doi.org/10.2991/jnmp.2003.10.3.6]

2003 doi
[37]

J. D. Brown and M. Henneaux, Central Charges in the Canonical Realization of Asymptotic Symmetries: An Example from Three-Dimensional Gravity , Commun. Math. Phys. 104 (1986) 207–226. – 45 –

1986
[38]

Camporesi and A

R. Camporesi and A. Higuchi, Spectral functions and zeta functions in hyperbolic spaces, J. Math. Phys. 35 (1994) 4217–4246

1994
[39]

Kitaev, Notes on ~SL(2, R) representations, arXiv:1711.08169

A. Kitaev, Notes on ~SL(2, R) representations, arXiv:1711.08169

arXiv
[40]

M. J. Duﬀ and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, Quantum inequivalence of diﬀerent ﬁeld representations, Physics Letters B 94 (July, 1980) 179–182

1980
[41]

Bastianelli, P

F. Bastianelli, P. Benincasa, and S. Giombi, Worldline approach to vector and antisymmetric tensor ﬁelds , JHEP 04 (2005) 010, [ hep-th/0503155]

2005 arXiv
[42]

Bastianelli, P

F. Bastianelli, P. Benincasa, and S. Giombi, Worldline approach to vector and antisymmetric tensor ﬁelds. II. , JHEP 10 (2005) 114, [ hep-th/0510010]

2005 arXiv
[43]

Larsen and P

F. Larsen and P. Lisbao, Divergences and boundary modes in N = 8 supergravity, JHEP 01 (2016) 024, [ arXiv:1508.03413]

2016 arXiv
[44]

G. W. Gibbons, S. W. Hawking, and M. J. Perry, Path Integrals and the Indeﬁniteness of the Gravitational Action , Nucl. Phys. B138 (1978) 141–150

1978
[45]

Schleich, Conformal Rotation in Perturbative Gravity , Phys

K. Schleich, Conformal Rotation in Perturbative Gravity , Phys. Rev. D36 (1987) 2342–2363. [,130(1987)]

1987
[46]

P. O. Mazur and E. Mottola, The Gravitational Measure, Solution of the Conformal Factor Problem and Stability of the Ground State of Quantum Gravity , Nucl. Phys. B341 (1990) 187–212

1990
[47]

Grumiller, J

D. Grumiller, J. Salzer, and D. Vassilevich, AdS2 holography is (non-)trivial for (non-)constant dilaton, JHEP 12 (2015) 015, [ arXiv:1509.08486]

2015 arXiv
[48]

M. J. Perry, Anomalies in supergravity, Nuclear Physics B 143 (1978), no. 1 114 – 124

1978
[49]

Tong and C

D. Tong and C. Turner, Quantum dynamics of supergravity on R 3× S1, JHEP 12 (2014) 142, [ arXiv:1408.3418]

2014 arXiv
[50]

A. M. Charles, F. Larsen, and D. R. Mayerson, Non-Renormalization For Non-Supersymmetric Black Holes , JHEP 08 (2017) 048, [ arXiv:1702.08458]

2017 arXiv
[51]

S. M. Christensen and M. J. Duﬀ, New Gravitational Index Theorems and Supertheorems, Nucl. Phys. B154 (1979) 301–342

1979
[52]

D. V. Vassilevich, Heat kernel expansion: User’s manual , Phys. Rept. 388 (2003) 279–360, [hep-th/0306138]

2003 arXiv
[53]

Sen, Microscopic and Macroscopic Entropy of Extremal Black Holes in String Theory, Gen

A. Sen, Microscopic and Macroscopic Entropy of Extremal Black Holes in String Theory, Gen. Rel. Grav. 46 (2014) 1711, [ arXiv:1402.0109]

2014 arXiv
[54]

A. M. Charles and F. Larsen, Universal corrections to non-extremal black hole entropy inN≥ 2 supergravity, JHEP 06 (2015) 200, [ arXiv:1505.01156]

2015 arXiv
[55]

Castro, V

A. Castro, V. Godet, F. Larsen, and Y. Zeng, Logarithmic Corrections to Black Hole Entropy: the Non-BPS Branch , JHEP 05 (2018) 079, [ arXiv:1801.01926]. – 46 –

2018 arXiv
[56]

Witten, Coadjoint Orbits of the Virasoro Group , Commun

E. Witten, Coadjoint Orbits of the Virasoro Group , Commun. Math. Phys. 114 (1988) 1

1988
[57]

Taylor, Virasoro representations on diﬀ S1 / S1 coadjoint orbits , hep-th/9204091

W. Taylor, Virasoro representations on diﬀ S1 / S1 coadjoint orbits , hep-th/9204091

arXiv
[58]

Castro and V

A. Castro and V. Godet, Breaking away from the near horizon of extreme Kerr , arXiv:1906.09083

1906 arXiv
[59]

G., Symmetry principles in atomic spectroscopy , J

Wybourne, B. G., Symmetry principles in atomic spectroscopy , J. Phys. Colloques 31 (1970) C4–33–C4–39. – 47 –

1970

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

J. M. Maldacena, J. Michelson, and A. Strominger, Anti-de Sitter fragmentation, JHEP 02 (1999) 011, [ hep-th/9812073]

arXiv 1999

[2] [2]

Strominger, AdS(2) quantum gravity and string theory , JHEP 01 (1999) 007, [hep-th/9809027]

A. Strominger, AdS(2) quantum gravity and string theory , JHEP 01 (1999) 007, [hep-th/9809027]

arXiv 1999

[3] [3]

Sachdev and J

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

arXiv 1993

[4] [4]

Kitaev, A simple model of quantum holography ,

A. Kitaev, A simple model of quantum holography , . – 43 –

work page

[5] [5]

Maldacena and D

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

arXiv 2016

[6] [6]

Maldacena, D

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

arXiv 2016

[7] [7]

Jensen, Chaos in AdS 2 Holography, Phys

K. Jensen, Chaos in AdS 2 Holography, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 (2016), no. 11 111601, [arXiv:1605.06098]

arXiv 2016

[8] [8]

Teitelboim, Gravitation and Hamiltonian Structure in Two Space-Time Dimensions , Phys

C. Teitelboim, Gravitation and Hamiltonian Structure in Two Space-Time Dimensions , Phys. Lett. 126B (1983) 41–45

1983