Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

The Quantum Null Energy Condition and Entanglement Entropy in Quenches

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 Using the quantum null energy condition, the paper bounds the early-time quadratic growth of entanglement entropy in homogeneous quenches by $\pi(e+p)$ and shows boundary-state quenches in CFTs saturate the bound.

desk verdict A clean QNEC application with a correct core bound; the higher-dimensional tightness claim is over-sold and Eq. (14) has a factor-of-2 slip, but the paper deserves refereeing. read the letter →

arxiv 1909.00919 v1 pith:2VYDQ27I submitted 2019-09-03 hep-th cond-mat.str-elquant-ph

Márk Mezei , Julio Virrueta This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thcond-mat.str-elquant-ph
keywords QuantumNullEnergyConditionentanglemententropyquenchboundarystateholographicdualityblackbranethermalizationconformalfieldtheory
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 turns the Quantum Null Energy Condition (QNEC), an inequality relating energy to the second variation of entanglement entropy, into a bound on how fast entropy grows immediately after a quantum quench. For a homogeneous, time-reflection-symmetric quench in any relativistic field theory, the coefficient $s_2$ of the $t^2$ term in half-space entanglement entropy satisfies $s_2 \le \pi(e+p)$, where $e$ is energy density and $p$ pressure. The paper argues the bound is tight: boundary-state quenches in conformal field theories saturate it, exactly in two spacetime dimensions and via holography in higher dimensions, with equality only for the planar black brane geometry $a(z)=1-z^d$. This is the first purely field-theoretic application of the QNEC and gives a universal consistency check for out-of-equilibrium entropy calculations.

What carries the argument

The central object is the nonlocal QNEC inequality $2\pi \int d^{d-2}y \sqrt{h}\langle T_{\mu\nu}\rangle k^\mu k^\nu \ge d^2S/d\lambda^2$, applied to a flat half-space entangling surface with null vector $k = \partial_+$ in a homogeneous state. Since homogeneity makes $\langle T_{++}\rangle = (e+p)/4$, the inequality reduces to an ordinary bound on the second time derivative of $S(t)$. Saturation is carried by the boundary-state quench $e^{-\beta H/4}|B\rangle$: in $d=2$ an exact CFT computation saturates the stronger QNEC, while in higher dimensions the holographic dual (a planar black brane cut by a tensionless end-of-world brane) lets the entropy be computed as an HRT surface; applying the bulk null energy condition to the metric functions $a(z)$, $b(z)$ converts that computation into the same bound, with equality only when $a(z)=1-z^d$ and $b(z)=1$.

What would settle it

Compute or measure $s_2$ for a homogeneous, time-reflection-symmetric quench in a relativistic QFT with known energy density and pressure; finding $s_2 > \pi(e+p)$ would disprove the central bound. For the saturation claim, finding a boundary-state quench in $d>2$ whose half-space $s_2$ is strictly below $\pi(e+p)$, or any null-energy-respecting bulk geometry that saturates $s_2^{(\rm holo)}=\pi(e+p)$ without being the $a(z)=1-z^d$, $b(z)=1$ black brane, would refute tightness while leaving the inequality intact.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the integrated QNEC, evaluated on a flat half-space entangling surface at a moment of time-reflection symmetry, yields the universal early-time inequality $d^2S/dt^2 \le 2\pi A_\Sigma(e+p)$, equivalently $s_2 \le \pi(e+p)$. The paper constructs states that reach the bound: the boundary-state quench $|\psi_0\rangle = e^{-\beta H/4}|B\rangle$ in a CFT. In $d=2$, the exact CFT entropy formula gives $s_2 = \pi(e+p)$ and in fact saturates the stronger form of the QNEC at all times. In $d>2$, the paper computes the entropy holographically from the dual geometry -- a planar black brane cut by an end-of-world brane -- and finds $s_2^{(\rm holo)} \le \pi(e+p)$, with equality only for the planar black brane $a(z)=1-z^d$, $b(z)=1$. A second protocol, a Vaidya collapsing-shell quench, obeys the strictly stronger holographic bound $s_2 \le \pi(e+p)/d$.

Load-bearing premise

The tightness claim in dimensions above two rests on the assumption that the boundary-state quench state is described holographically by a planar black brane cut in half by a tensionless end-of-world brane; the paper itself notes this identification is established only for specific boundary states in holographic theories, and the inequality bound does not depend on it, but the saturation claim does.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any computed, simulated, or measured $s_2$ for a homogeneous time-reflection-symmetric quench in a relativistic QFT must satisfy $s_2 \le \pi(e+p)$, giving a universal consistency check.
  • Because boundary-state quenches in CFTs saturate the bound, the inequality cannot be strengthened without adding assumptions about the state.
  • In $d=2$ CFTs the boundary-state quench saturates the stronger QNEC at all times, making its full entropy evolution extremal among such quenches.
  • In holographic theories the bulk null energy condition independently reproduces the bound, and equality forces the bulk geometry to be the planar black brane with $a(z)=1-z^d$, $b(z)=1$.
  • For Vaidya-type quenches the stronger holographic result $s_2 \le \pi(e+p)/d$ shows that states with special microstructure can lie well below the universal ceiling.

Reading between the lines

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

  • One step beyond the paper: the equality case in the holographic proof implies that, in holographic CFTs, maximal early-time entanglement growth is tied to a state whose dual geometry has no matter sources; a direct field-theoretic derivation of that condition would identify which CFT states are 'fastest' without invoking gravity.
  • The $d=2$ all-times saturation of the stronger QNEC suggests an extremal principle for entanglement growth over the whole quench; a testable question is how accurately finite-width intervals $L$ preserve the saturation for $t<L/2$ and how it degrades later.
  • The factor-$d$ Vaidya bound is proven only holographically; since the paper notes an existing relative-entropy strategy gives only the weaker bound, an improved field-theoretic argument may close the gap and extend the result to non-holographic theories.
  • Because the bound holds for any relativistic QFT state, cold-atom or lattice implementations of homogeneous quenches could measure $s_2/[\pi(e+p)]$ as a dimensionless probe of how close a protocol comes to the fastest possible entanglement growth.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript derives a bound on the early-time quadratic coefficient s2 of the entanglement entropy in homogeneous quenches, s2 <= pi(e+p), where e and p are the energy density and pressure. The derivation starts from the integrated (nonlocal) quantum null energy condition, specialized to a time-reflection-symmetric initial state. The authors show saturation in d=2 using the Calabrese-Cardy exact result for boundary state quenches, and in d>2 by a holographic computation in which the null energy condition implies the same inequality for the early-time HRT entropy, with equality only for the AdS-Schwarzschild black brane. They also derive a stronger bound s2 <= pi(e+p)/d for Vaidya-type quenches. The paper is written as a letter with a supplemental material containing the holographic derivations.

Significance. If correct, the bound provides a model-independent, field-theoretic constraint on entanglement growth in quenches, with a simple derivation from the QNEC and concrete saturation examples. The holographic NEC argument in the supplemental material is a genuine proof rather than a definitional identity, and the d=2 saturation is an exact CFT result. The paper thus offers a useful new application of the QNEC, and the bound may serve as a consistency check for numerical and experimental studies of entanglement dynamics. The significance is somewhat tempered by the fact that the d>2 saturation is conditional on a specific holographic state/geometry identification, which is not established for generic boundary states.

major comments (3)
  1. [Quenches saturating the bound, Eq. (14)] Equation (14) is numerically incorrect: with S(t) from (12) and e=p=c*pi/(6*beta^2), direct differentiation gives \ddot S + (6/c) \dot S^2 = (2 c pi^2/(3 beta^2))[sech^2 + tanh^2] = 2 pi (e+p), not pi (e+p) as stated. The discrepancy appears to originate in Eq. (7), which is missing a factor 2*pi relative to the nonlocal QNEC (3) in d=2. The claimed saturation can be repaired by writing the stronger inequality as 2*pi <T_kk> >= Sddot + (6/c) Sdot^2, for which the Calabrese-Cardy solution is indeed an equality for all times. Please correct Eqs. (7) and (14) and adjust the surrounding text.
  2. [Bounding entropy using the QNEC, Eqs. (4)-(5)] The statement that for homogeneous states 'the stress tensor is a conserved current, its one point function is time independent' is not generally true. Conservation only implies partial_t <T^{00}> = partial_t <T^{0i}> = 0 when spatial derivatives vanish; the spatial components <T^{ij}> can depend on time in a generic homogeneous QFT. For the early-time bound, only the value at t=0 is needed, so the argument should explicitly define p = p(0) in Eq. (2). In CFTs, tracelessness and rotational invariance make p constant, but this assumption should be stated rather than implied by conservation alone.
  3. [Abstract and Conclusions; Quenches saturating the bound, Eq. (15)] The abstract claims that the bound is saturated by boundary state quenches in conformal field theories 'in any dimensions.' The d>2 argument relies on identifying the state e^{-beta H/4}|B> with the half-eternal AdS-Schwarzschild black brane cut by a tensionless end-of-world brane (Eq. (15)), together with the assumption that <H> = E(beta). As the paper itself notes in footnotes 30 and 35, this identification is established only for special holographic boundary states. Therefore the tightness of (2) is currently demonstrated only for a restricted class of holographic CFTs and specific |B>, not for generic CFTs in d>2. Please qualify the abstract, the introduction, and the conclusions accordingly.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Introduction, Eq. (2)] The displayed bound s2 <= pi c/\hbar (e+p) is inconsistent with the \hbar=c=1 convention used throughout and with the saturation value (13), which gives s2 = pi(e+p). Please remove the c/\hbar factor or explain the intended dimensional restoration.
  2. [Quenches saturating the bound, Eq. (18)] The expression C2/C2_1 in Eq. (18) is ambiguous; it should read C2/C1^2 to match the definitions of C1 and C2 in Eq. (31).
  3. [Throughout] There are minor typographical issues: 'ommited' should be 'omitted', and 'Schwartzschild' should be 'Schwarzschild'. Please proofread the text.
  4. [Generalizations for CFTs, text after Eq. (10)] The phrase 'we ommited the \Delta from s2(R)' could be clearer: the entropy S(t,R) is time dependent while the vacuum term is not, so the vacuum-subtracted and unsubtracted quadratic coefficients coincide; please state this directly.
  5. [Abstract] The assertion that these are 'the first purely field theoretic applications of the QNEC' should be checked against the literature; if there are prior field-theoretic applications, the claim should be softened or removed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the bound follows directly from the QNEC and the saturation checks use independent CFT and holographic calculations.

full rationale

The central bound (2) is derived by specializing the nonlocal QNEC (3) to k=∂+ on a planar entangling surface, giving (5), and then using time-reflection symmetry to write S(t)=S0+s2 AΣ t^2+O(t^4). This is a direct application of an independent inequality: s2 is the second time derivative of half-space entanglement entropy and e+p is the null-null stress-tensor component, so the bound is not a restatement of the definition of either quantity. No parameter is fitted to s2. The d=2 saturation check compares the expansion of the Calabrese-Cardy result (12) with the CFT equation of state; the equality (13) is a nontrivial match, not an identity imposed by fit. In d>2, the holographic saturation proof derives an inequality between two independent functionals of the metric (15): s2^(holo) from the HRT area integrals (16)-(18) and π(e+p) from the Fefferman-Graham coefficient a_d via (19). The NEC argument in the Supplemental Material (Eqs. (33)-(42)) establishes s2^(holo) ≤ π(e+p) with equality only for AdS-Schwarzschild; this is a genuine mathematical inequality, not a definitional equivalence. The paper itself flags the assumption that the state e^{-βH/4}|B> is dual to the half-eternal black brane with a tensionless end-of-world brane (footnotes [30], [35]); this is a conjectural state/geometry identification that limits the tightness claim for generic boundary states, but it is an unproven assumption, not circularity. Self-citations to [24], [26], [47], [58] are used for standard area functionals, NEC parametrization, and known entropy-growth bounds; they are not the sole or load-bearing justification of the paper's central claim, and the cited results are independently published. Overall, no step reduces by construction to its own input.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No numeric parameters are fitted to data. The metric functions a(z), b(z) in the holographic proof are arbitrary functions constrained by the NEC and AdS boundary conditions; the Schwarzschild case is a specific choice, not a fit. The quench parameter beta sets the energy scale of the state and is not adjusted to make the bound hold. All axioms are standard domain assumptions from prior literature or the paper's own stated setup.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The nonlocal QNEC 2 pi integral d^{d-2}y sqrt(h) <T_kk> >= d^2/d lambda^2 S[Sigma(lambda)] (Eq. (3)) holds for the states and entangling surfaces used.
    The paper takes QNEC as a proven inequality from prior literature [1-5] and does not derive it. If QNEC failed for out-of-equilibrium quench states, the bound (2) would not follow.
  • domain assumption The stronger 2D QNEC <T_kk> >= S'' + 6/c (S')^2 (Eq. (7)) holds with the stated normalization.
    Used to claim all-time saturation in d=2 CFTs. Note: the normalization appears to be missing a factor 2 pi, leading to the factor-of-2 error in Eq. (14).
  • domain assumption The HRT prescription and holographic dictionary give the entanglement entropy and stress tensor in the bulk geometry.
    Used to compute s2^(holo) via extremal surface areas and to read off pi(e+p) from the near-boundary metric (Eq. (19)).
  • domain assumption The boundary state quench e^{-beta H/4}|B> is dual to the half-eternal black brane cut by a tensionless end-of-world brane (Eq. (15)).
    Needed for the higher-dimensional saturation computation; only valid for specific |B> in holographic CFTs (footnote [30]).
  • domain assumption The quench state is homogeneous and time-reflection symmetric at t=0, so S(t)=S0+s2 A Sigma t^2+O(t^4).
    Required for the early-time expansion and for setting Sdot(0)=0.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Quantum Null Energy Condition and Entanglement Entropy in Quenches." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2VYDQ27I

@misc{pith2026190900919,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Quantum Null Energy Condition and Entanglement Entropy in Quenches},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2VYDQ27I}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1909.00919}
}
read the original abstract

The Quantum Null Energy Condition (QNEC) relates energy to the second variation of entropy in relativistic quantum field theory. We use the QNEC inequality to bound entanglement entropy in quenches. At early times the entanglement entropy grows quadratically in time, and the QNEC provides an upper bound on the prefactor. We demonstrate that the bound is tight, by showing that it is saturated in certain quench protocols: boundary state quenches in conformal field theories in any dimensions. In higher than two dimensions we compute entanglement entropy using AdS/CFT. Our results are the first purely field theoretic applications of the QNEC.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1909.00919 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Penrose diagram of the spacetime dual to the bound [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Penrose diagram of a Vaidya spacetime. The infalling [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

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. The entanglement membrane in 2d CFT: reflected entropy, RG flow, and information velocity

    hep-th 2024-11 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A generalized entanglement membrane with an extra bulk-depth degree of freedom correctly captures reflected entropy in 2d CFT, and a relevant deformation restores the ordinary non-degenerate membrane tension.

  2. Generalized Clausius inequalities and entanglement production in holographic two-dimensional CFTs

    hep-th 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    In holographic 2D CFTs, the quantum null energy condition bounds entropy production in quenches between thermal states with momentum, giving generalized Clausius inequalities and exact entanglement growth laws.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [30]

    That the expectation value is E(β) is only known to be true in d = 2 CFT and higher dimensional holographic 6 theories for the boundary states that we analyze: the two examples that we will be considering

    work page

  2. [1]

    Bousso, Z

    R. Bousso, Z. Fisher, J. Koeller, S. Leichenauer, and A. C. Wall, Phys. Rev. D93, 024017 (2016), arXiv:1509.02542 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2016

  3. [2]

    Koeller and S

    J. Koeller and S. Leichenauer, Phys. Rev. D94, 024026 (2016), arXiv:1512.06109 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2016

  4. [3]

    A. C. Wall, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 151601 (2017), arXiv:1701.03196 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2017

  5. [4]

    Balakrishnan, T

    S. Balakrishnan, T. Faulkner, Z. U. Khandker, and H. Wang, (2017), arXiv:1706.09432 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2017

  6. [5]

    Ceyhan and T

    F. Ceyhan and T. Faulkner, (2018), arXiv:1812.04683 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2018

  7. [6]

    Calabrese and J

    P. Calabrese and J. L. Cardy, J. Stat. Mech. 0504, P04010 (2005), arXiv:cond-mat/0503393 [cond-mat]

    arXiv 2005

  8. [7]

    Hartman and J

    T. Hartman and J. Maldacena, JHEP 05, 014 (2013), arXiv:1303.1080 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2013

Show all 60 references
  1. [8]

    J. H. Bardarson, F. Pollmann, and J. E. Moore, Physical review letters 109, 017202 (2012)

    2012

  2. [9]

    Serbyn, Z

    M. Serbyn, Z. Papi´ c, and D. A. Abanin, Physical review letters 110, 260601 (2013)

    2013

  3. [10]

    Kim and D

    H. Kim and D. A. Huse, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 127205 (2013), arXiv:1306.4306 [quant-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Hayden and J

    P. Hayden and J. Preskill, JHEP 09, 120 (2007), arXiv:0708.4025 [hep-th]

    2007 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Lashkari, D

    N. Lashkari, D. Stanford, M. Hastings, T. Osborne, and P. Hayden, JHEP 04, 022 (2013), arXiv:1111.6580 [hep- th]

    2013 arXiv

  6. [13]

    A. M. Kaufman, M. E. Tai, A. Lukin, M. Rispoli, R. Schittko, P. M. Preiss, and M. Greiner, Science 353, 794 (2016)

    2016

  7. [14]

    Casini, Class

    H. Casini, Class. Quant. Grav. 25, 205021 (2008), arXiv:0804.2182 [hep-th]

    2008 arXiv

  8. [15]

    Bousso, H

    R. Bousso, H. Casini, Z. Fisher, and J. Maldacena, Phys. Rev. D90, 044002 (2014), arXiv:1404.5635 [hep-th]

    2014 arXiv

  9. [16]

    Bousso, H

    R. Bousso, H. Casini, Z. Fisher, and J. Maldacena, Phys. Rev. D91, 084030 (2015), arXiv:1406.4545 [hep-th]

    2015 arXiv

  10. [17]

    Faulkner, R

    T. Faulkner, R. G. Leigh, O. Parrikar, and H. Wang, JHEP 09, 038 (2016), arXiv:1605.08072 [hep-th]

    2016 arXiv

  11. [18]

    Hartman, S

    T. Hartman, S. Kundu, and A. Tajdini, JHEP 07, 066 (2017), arXiv:1610.05308 [hep-th]

    2017 arXiv

  12. [19]

    The null vector fieldkµ(y) has to be such that sufficiently many derivatives of the extrinsic curvature tensor vanish in the kµ direction: kµ∇i1···∇ inKµ jk = 0

  13. [20]

    Importantly, the saturation of the local version does not imply that the nonlocal version (3) is also saturated

    We note that a local version of the QNEC refers to a contact term in the variation of (3), and is always satu- rated in CFTs with a twist gap [52, 53]. Importantly, the saturation of the local version does not imply that the nonlocal version (3) is also saturated

  14. [21]

    Any non-flat surface will have an extrinsic curvature in the normal vector di- rection, kµKµ jk⁄= 0 violating the condition discussed in [19]

    The requirement that the entangling surfaces Σ( λ) be- long to a constant time slice restricts the time compo- nent of kµ to be a constant, and the surface orthogo- nality condition fixes kµ = const· (1, ˆ n), where ˆ nis the unit normal vector to the surface. Any non-flat surfa...

  15. [22]

    Liu and S

    H. Liu and S. J. Suh, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 011601 (2014), arXiv:1305.7244 [hep-th]

    2014 arXiv

  16. [23]

    Liu and S

    H. Liu and S. J. Suh, Phys. Rev. D89, 066012 (2014), arXiv:1311.1200 [hep-th]

    2014 arXiv

  17. [24]

    Casini, H

    H. Casini, H. Liu, and M. Mezei, JHEP 07, 077 (2016), arXiv:1509.05044 [hep-th]

    2016 arXiv

  18. [25]

    Hartman and N

    T. Hartman and N. Afkhami-Jeddi, (2015), arXiv:1512.02695 [hep-th]

    2015 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Mezei and D

    M. Mezei and D. Stanford, JHEP 05, 065 (2017), arXiv:1608.05101 [hep-th]

    2017 arXiv

  20. [27]

    A. C. Wall, Phys. Rev. D85, 024015 (2012), arXiv:1105.3520 [gr-qc]

    2012 arXiv

  21. [28]

    Neither ∆S0 nor s2 can depend on R in such states

  22. [29]

    Calabrese and J

    P. Calabrese and J. Cardy, J. Stat. Mech. 1606, 064003 (2016), arXiv:1603.02889 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    2016 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Returning to (6), for this quench we have vE = 1, seq = cπ 3β , and the linear growth only contributes to the new second term in (14)

  24. [32]

    Ryu and T

    S. Ryu and T. Takayanagi, JHEP 0608, 045 (2006), arXiv:hep-th/0605073 [hep-th]

    2006 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Ryu and T

    S. Ryu and T. Takayanagi, Phys.Rev.Lett. 96, 181602 (2006), arXiv:hep-th/0603001 [hep-th]

    2006 arXiv

  26. [34]

    V. E. Hubeny, M. Rangamani, and T. Takayanagi, JHEP 07, 062 (2007), arXiv:0705.0016 [hep-th]

    2007 arXiv

  27. [35]

    The brane tension is set by the boundary state |B⟩, see [54–56] for spacetimes with branes that have nonzero tension

    Here we chose the brane to be tensionless. The brane tension is set by the boundary state |B⟩, see [54–56] for spacetimes with branes that have nonzero tension

  28. [36]

    Balasubramanian and P

    V. Balasubramanian and P. Kraus, Commun. Math. Phys. 208, 413 (1999), arXiv:hep-th/9902121 [hep-th]

    1999 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Ecker, D

    C. Ecker, D. Grumiller, W. van der Schee, and P. Stanzer, Phys. Rev. D97, 126016 (2018), arXiv:1710.09837 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Z. U. Khandker, S. Kundu, and D. Li, JHEP 08, 162 (2018), arXiv:1803.03997 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Ecker, D

    C. Ecker, D. Grumiller, W. van der Schee, M. M. Sheikh- Jabbari, and P. Stanzer, SciPost Phys. 6, 036 (2019), arXiv:1901.04499 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Anous, T

    T. Anous, T. Hartman, A. Rovai, and J. Sonner, JHEP 07, 123 (2016), arXiv:1603.04856 [hep-th]

    2016 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Anous, T

    T. Anous, T. Hartman, A. Rovai, and J. Sonner, JHEP 09, 009 (2017), arXiv:1706.02668 [hep-th]

    2017 arXiv

  34. [42]

    To get a more precise match with the Vaidya geometry, in the large c limit we take the limits c→∞ , ∆O/c = fixed, e/c = fixed first, followed by a → 0, ∆O/c → 0, ∆O/(cad)∝e/c = fixed

  35. [43]

    In the main text, we evolve the state|ψ0⟩ (21) with a CFT Hamiltonian, hencep =e/(d−1) by the equation of state, but in the SM we consider a more general setup, where we evolve with a possibly massive QFT Hamiltonian

  36. [44]

    This alternative strategy might perhaps be improved to show (23)

    There is a proof strategy [57] based on the positivity of relative entropy which in its current incarnation can proves2≤π(e +p) for states of the type (21), but that does not apply to the boundary state quenches (11) that were the most interesting for this paper. This alternat...

  37. [45]

    The value of c should be taken to be the emergent speed of light

  38. [46]

    Jonay, D

    C. Jonay, D. A. Huse, and A. Nahum, (2018), arXiv:1803.00089 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    2018 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Mezei, Phys

    M. Mezei, Phys. Rev. D98, 106025 (2018), arXiv:1803.10244 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Zhou and A

    T. Zhou and A. Nahum, Phys. Rev. B99, 174205 (2019), arXiv:1804.09737 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    2019 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Rakovszky, F

    T. Rakovszky, F. Pollmann, and C. W. von Keyserlingk, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 250602 (2019), arXiv:1901.10502 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2019 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Kudler-Flam, M

    J. Kudler-Flam, M. Nozaki, S. Ryu, and M. T. Tan, (2019), arXiv:1906.07639 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Wang and T

    H. Wang and T. Zhou, (2019), arXiv:1907.09581 [hep- th]

    2019 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Leichenauer, A

    S. Leichenauer, A. Levine, and A. Shahbazi- Moghaddam, Phys. Rev. D98, 086013 (2018), arXiv:1802.02584 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Balakrishnan, V

    S. Balakrishnan, V. Chandrasekaran, T. Faulkner, A. Levine, and A. Shahbazi-Moghaddam, (2019), arXiv:1906.08274 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Kourkoulou and J

    I. Kourkoulou and J. Maldacena, (2017), arXiv:1707.02325 [hep-th]

    2017 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Almheiri, A

    A. Almheiri, A. Mousatov, and M. Shyani, (2018), arXiv:1803.04434 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Cooper, M

    S. Cooper, M. Rozali, B. Swingle, M. Van Raamsdonk, C. Waddell, and D. Wakeham, JHEP 07, 065 (2019), arXiv:1810.10601 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Quantum quenches and bound- ary entropy: some new applications of relative entropy,

    R. Arias and H. Casini, “Quantum quenches and bound- ary entropy: some new applications of relative entropy,” (2016), talk at the YITP, Kyoto. http://www2.yukawa. kyoto-u.ac.jp/~entangle2016/YCasini.pdf

    2016

  50. [58]

    Mezei, JHEP 05, 064 (2017), arXiv:1612.00082 [hep- th]

    M. Mezei, JHEP 05, 064 (2017), arXiv:1612.00082 [hep- th]

    2017 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Skenderis, The quantum structure of space-time and the geometric nature of fundamental interactions

    K. Skenderis, The quantum structure of space-time and the geometric nature of fundamental interactions. Pro- ceedings, RTN European Winter School, RTN 2002, Utrecht, Netherlands, January 17-22, 2002 , Class. Quant. Grav. 19, 5849 (2002), arXiv:hep-th/0209067 [hep-th]

    2002 arXiv

  52. [60]

    The Quantum Null Energy Condition and Entanglement Entropy in Quenches

    S. Leichenauer, M. Moosa, and M. Smolkin, JHEP 09, 035 (2016), arXiv:1604.00388 [hep-th]. 7 Supplemental Material for “The Quantum Null Energy Condition and Entanglement Entropy in Quenches” Holographic entanglement entropy for the boundary state quench We present the derivati...

    2016 arXiv

Pith tools

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