Enhanced Conformal $BMS_3$ Symmetries

David Tempo; Iva Lovrekovic; Oscar Fuentealba; Ricardo Troncoso

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Enhanced Conformal $BMS_3$ Symmetries

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Adding a spin-2 field to 3D conformal gravity forces the asymptotic symmetries to close into a nonlinear W(2,2,2,2,1,1,1) algebra with all central charges fixed by one Virasoro central charge.

desk verdict A new nonlinear W(2,2,2,2,1,1,1) algebra from a Pope-Townsend extension of conformal gravity; plausible but needs the derivation shown. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.00439 v2 pith:YLXXS7XF submitted 2024-12-31 hep-th gr-qc

Oscar Fuentealba , Iva Lovrekovic , David Tempo , Ricardo Troncoso This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-thgr-qc

keywords enhancedconformalBMS3algebraW-algebraasymptoticsymmetriesgravityin3DChern-SimonstheoryhigherspinfieldsSO(42)centralcharge

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 shows that a particular extension of three-dimensional conformal gravity, the theory with an additional spin-2 field, admits boundary conditions whose asymptotic symmetry algebra is a new nonlinear algebra: the enhanced conformal BMS3 algebra. The algebra is a W(2,2,2,2,1,1,1) algebra, meaning it has four currents of conformal weight 2 and three currents of weight 1, with a Virasoro subalgebra, the algebra of conformal transformations of the circle. A distinctive feature is rigidity: once the Virasoro central charge $k$ is fixed by the Chern-Simons level, every other central extension and every coefficient of the nonlinear terms is determined. The lowest-mode, finite-dimensional part of the algebra is SO(4,2), so the enhanced algebra can also be read as an infinite-dimensional nonlinear extension of the AdS5 algebra with nontrivial central charges. If the construction is correct, this gives a gravitational derivation of a nonlinear W-algebra from a three-dimensional theory of conformal gravity plus a spin-2 field.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the asymptotic gauge-field ansatz (2.5): a Chern-Simons connection for $\mathfrak{so}(4,2)$ in a radial gauge, with the quadratic function $\Lambda^{(2)}$ built from the currents $M^I$. Preservation of this fall-off under gauge transformations fixes the transformation laws (2.9), from which the canonical charges (2.11) and their Dirac-bracket algebra follow. The nonlinear terms (2.14), carrying conformal weights 2 and 3, are what turn the linear conformal BMS3 algebra into the enhanced nonlinear W-algebra; their coefficients and the central charges are fixed by the normalization of the Cartan-Killing metric, equivalently by the single Virasoro central charge.

What would settle it

Compute the asymptotic symmetry algebra for the same extended conformal gravity theory using boundary conditions that include the sources conjugate to the new charges, and check whether the brackets still match (2.13); alternatively, verify the Jacobi identities directly for the proposed algebra (2.13) with the nonlinear terms (2.14). A failure in either check would falsify the claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the extended conformal gravity theory in three dimensions, with the boundary conditions (2.5)-(2.8), has canonical asymptotic symmetry generators spanning the enhanced conformal BMS3 algebra. In Fourier modes the algebra is (2.13) with the nonlinear terms in (2.14); the currents $J_m$ and $P^I_m$ carry conformal weight 2 while the currents $M^I_m$ carry weight 1, which makes it a W(2,2,2,2,1,1,1) algebra. Every central extension and every coefficient of the quadratic and cubic nonlinear terms is controlled by the Virasoro central charge $k$, and the algebra is well defined only when $k$ is nonzero. Restricting the modes to $|m|<s$ and dropping the nonlinear terms recovers the wedge subalgebra SO(4,2), the finite-dimensional part of the symmetry, so the full algebra is an infinite-dimensional nonlinear extension of the AdS5 algebra with nontrivial central extensions.

Load-bearing premise

The whole construction rests on the specific fall-off conditions (2.5)-(2.8), including the quadratic function $\Lambda^{(2)}$ built from the currents; if the physically correct boundary conditions for the extended theory differ, for instance by including the sources conjugate to the new charges, the symmetry algebra could change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The BMS supertranslation generators no longer commute with themselves: the bracket of two $P^0$ modes acquires a nonlinear term built from the $M^0$ currents, and the same happens for $P^1$ (special conformal transformations), so commutativity is lost already at the classical level.
The enhanced conformal BMS3 algebra is an infinite-dimensional nonlinear extension of the AdS5 algebra with nontrivial central charges, which sidesteps the usual cohomological obstruction to central extensions of semisimple algebras.
The Virasoro central charge must be nonzero for the nonlinear terms to be well defined, so the enhancement exists only in theories where the Chern-Simons level is nonzero.
The boundary conditions (2.5)-(2.8) may serve as a starting point for coupling a finite or infinite tower of conformal higher spin fields; the paper expects the resulting full symmetry to be nonlinear in a twofold way.
The lowest-mode wedge subalgebra is SO(4,2), the conformal group in four dimensions, so the finite-dimensional part of the enhanced algebra matches the conformal group rather than the Poincaré group.

Reading between the lines

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

If the rigidity observed here is a genuine structural fact, the enhanced conformal BMS3 algebra may be the unique nonlinear completion of the linear conformal BMS3 algebra with these weights; an independent classification of W(2,2,2,2,1,1,1) algebras with the same central-charge dependence would test that.
A direct next step would be to look for black-hole or cosmological solutions of the extended theory carrying the new spin-2 charge; if no such solutions exist, the symmetry algebra is still consistent but its gravitational role would be less direct.
The loss of commutativity among supertranslations is a classical signal that should appear in any putative holographic dual as a deformation of the usual BMS3 Ward identities, potentially visible in three-point functions.

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

Here's my take. The paper claims a new infinite-dimensional nonlinear extension of conformal BMS_3, coming from the Pope-Townsend extension of conformal gravity in 3D, and I think the claim is likely true. The algebra, W(2,2,2,2,1,1,1), has P-P and K-K commutators that pick up nonlinear terms built from the spin-1 currents, with all coefficients fixed by the Chern-Simons level. That's genuinely new relative to the earlier conformal BMS_3, and the wedge reduction to SO(4,2) is a nice consistency check.

What's good: the setup is clean, the paper is honest about what it's doing, and the result connects to higher-spin generalizations. The citation pattern looks fair, and the central charge entering as the only parameter is a real constraint, not an adjustable knob.

The soft spots are real but manageable. The boundary conditions (2.5) are chosen, not derived. The paper shows they're preserved under the gauge transformations and that charges can be defined, but it doesn't prove they're forced by finiteness/integrability or that they're the most general consistent choice. The authors themselves note that adding chemical potentials would change the asymptotic fall-off and could alter the algebra. That means (2.13) is a property of this particular ansatz rather than an intrinsic feature of the theory. That's a fair criticism, but it's not fatal: boundary conditions are part of the definition of the phase space, and the paper is up front about the choice.

Second, the derivation is compressed. The gauge transformations and Dirac brackets are 'straightforwardly obtained,' but for a nonlinear algebra with cubic terms, that's not enough for a referee to verify without redoing the computation. No explicit Jacobi identity check is shown. The earlier work on conformal BMS_3 suggests the algebra is rigid, so I'd expect it to hold, but the paper should provide the details or an appendix.

Who should read it: people in asymptotic symmetries, 3D gravity, and W-algebras. It's a short but solid contribution. I'd send it to peer review. The referee should ask for the explicit algebra derivation and for a discussion of the status of the boundary conditions. If those come back, this will be a useful reference.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a set of asymptotic boundary conditions for the extension of three-dimensional conformal gravity due to Pope and Townsend, formulated as a Chern-Simons gauge theory for SO(4,2). With these boundary conditions, the authors claim that the canonical generators of the asymptotic symmetries span an enhanced, nonlinear conformal BMS_3 algebra, which they write as a W(2,2,2,2,1,1,1) algebra in Fourier modes, with all central extensions and nonlinear coefficients fixed by the Virasoro central charge. The paper also states that the wedge subalgebra recovers SO(4,2), interprets the result as a nonlinear extension of the AdS_5 algebra, and notes that the enhanced algebra is no longer commutative in the supertranslation sector.

Significance. If the claims are correct, the paper provides a concrete, action-derived realization of a nonlinear enhancement of the conformal BMS_3 algebra, extending the earlier conformal BMS_3 construction of Ref. [6] to the full SO(4,2) gauge group. The result is significant because the rigidity of the algebra, with central charges and nonlinear coefficients fixed by one parameter, makes it a promising candidate for holographic or higher-spin extensions. The explicit boundary conditions and the proposed algebra are useful and falsifiable. However, the paper is short on computational detail: the preservation of the boundary conditions, the construction of the canonical charges, and the Dirac-bracket computation that leads to the central result are summarized rather than shown. The boundary conditions are also presented as an ansatz without an argument that they are forced by the theory, which limits the strength of the claim that the algebra is the asymptotic symmetry algebra of the Pope-Townsend model.

major comments (3)

[Sec. 2.1, Eqs. (2.5)-(2.8)] The boundary conditions are introduced as a suitable ansatz and are shown to be preserved by the gauge transformations (2.7)-(2.8), but no argument is given that they are required by the theory, e.g., by finiteness and integrability of the charges, differentiability of the action, or a uniqueness argument within the Chern-Simons phase space. Since the quadratic fall-off Lambda^(2) in Eq. (2.6) is the sole input that produces the nonlinear terms in the algebra (2.13), this is a load-bearing point. The paper should either prove that these fall-off conditions are the most general ones consistent with the standard criteria, or explicitly state that the result is conditional on this particular choice. The discussion in Sec. 3, where the authors note that including chemical potentials would require different asymptotic behavior along the lines of Refs. [36,37], reinforces this concern.
[Sec. 2.1, Eqs. (2.9)-(2.13)] The derivation leading from the transformation law (2.9) to the Dirac-bracket algebra (2.12)-(2.13) is not shown. In particular, the computation of the gauge parameter Omega from the preservation of the fall-off, the definition of the charges Q in Eq. (2.11), and the Dirac brackets are stated without intermediate steps. Given that the main quantitative results are the central extensions and the specific coefficients in the nonlinear terms (2.14), the authors should present the essential computation, or at least include an appendix with the key steps, so that the result can be independently checked.
[Eq. (2.13) and Sec. 3] The paper does not explicitly verify the Jacobi identity for the nonlinear algebra (2.13). For a classical algebra obtained from canonical Dirac brackets, Jacobi is automatic if the charges have been correctly constructed, but this should be stated; if the algebra is instead meant to be a new nonlinear W-algebra independent of the Chern-Simons realization, an explicit check of the Jacobi identity is necessary to establish that (2.13) is a consistent algebra. The authors should add this check or a clear argument explaining why the Chern-Simons construction guarantees it.

minor comments (4)

[Abstract and Sec. 1] The typesetting of 'W(2,2,2,2,1,1,1)' is inconsistent (the abstract uses subscripted parentheses in the full text but not in the abstract). Please unify the notation.
[Eq. (2.5)] The notation Lambda^(2) = tau_IJ Lambda^IJ_(2) is confusing because the left-hand side is a scalar while the right-hand side involves the tensor Lambda^IJ_(2). Clarify the index structure, for example by writing Lambda^(2) explicitly as tau_IJ Lambda^IJ_(2) everywhere.
[Eqs. (2.13)-(2.14)] The nonlinear products in (2.14) are classical products, but the paper notes that quantum corrections will appear. It would improve clarity to state explicitly that no normal ordering is implied in the classical algebra and that the quantum algebra requires a separate treatment.
[Sec. 3] The sentence 'the full extension ... should necessarily be nonlinear in a two-folded way' is grammatically awkward; consider rewording for clarity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the enhanced conformal BMS3 algebra is derived from the so(4,2) Chern-Simons action and an explicitly proposed, preserved set of boundary conditions, not assumed as input.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is explicit and self-contained. Starting from the Pope-Townsend extension of 3D conformal gravity formulated as an so(4,2) Chern-Simons theory (Eqs. (2.1)-(2.4)), the authors adopt a radial gauge following Coussaert-Henneaux-van Driel [22] and propose the fall-off (2.5)-(2.8), with dynamical fields J, P_I, M_I and the quadratic combination Lambda^(2) defined in (2.6). They then compute the transformations that preserve this fall-off (2.9), construct the canonical charges (2.11), and evaluate their Dirac brackets to obtain the W(2,2,2,2,1,1,1) algebra (2.12)-(2.14). The nonlinear coefficients in (2.14), e.g. 4/k and -3/k, and the central extensions are fixed by the already chosen normalizations and the Chern-Simons level k; no parameter is fitted to the final algebra, and no equation of the final algebra is inserted as an input. The statement that the wedge algebra is SO(4,2) is a consistency check of the finite-mode truncation, not an independent prediction used to derive anything. Self-citations [6] and [14] provide context and identification of the theory, but the central-charge/nonlinear-coefficient relations follow from the displayed boundary conditions and Dirac brackets, not from those citations. The concern that the boundary conditions are an ansatz rather than forced by the action is a correctness or completeness issue, not a circularity, because the paper does not claim to derive the fall-off from the theory. No circular step can be exhibited.

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

The computation rests on the choice of boundary conditions (2.5) and the identification of canonical charges. No free parameters are fitted to data. The axioms listed are standard tools in the Chern-Simons asymptotic symmetry program. No new physical entities are invented; the extra spin-2 field comes from the pre-existing Pope-Townsend extension.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Chern-Simons formulation of conformal gravity and its Pope-Townsend extension to so(4,2) describes the theory under study.
Used in Section 2 to write the action (2.3)-(2.4); relies on refs [10-12,14].
domain assumption The radial-gauge reduction A = g^{-1} a g + g^{-1} dg, with functions depending on t and phi and satisfying chiral conditions, captures all relevant asymptotic data.
Invoked in Section 2.1 following [22]; this is a modeling assumption that could miss zero-mode or non-chiral contributions.
standard math The invariant bilinear form on so(4,2) is unique up to normalization as in (2.2), so central terms are controlled by the Chern-Simons level k.
Used in Section 3 to argue rigidity; standard for semisimple Lie algebras.
domain assumption The canonical generators Q in (2.11) and their Dirac brackets give the charge algebra.
Standard Regge-Teitelboim / Barnich-Brandt method; assumed when extracting (2.12)-(2.13), with the computation not shown.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Enhanced Conformal $BMS_3$ Symmetries." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YLXXS7XF

@misc{pith2026250100439,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Enhanced Conformal $BMS_3$ Symmetries},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YLXXS7XF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.00439}
}

abstract

An enhanced version of the conformal BMS$_{3}$ algebra is presented. It is shown to emerge from the asymptotic structure of an extension of conformal gravity in 3D by Pope and Townsend that consistently accommodates an additional spin-2 field, once it is endowed with a suitable set of boundary conditions. The canonical generators of the asymptotic symmetries then span a precise nonlinear W$_{(2,2,2,2,1,1,1)}$ algebra, whose central extensions and coefficients of the nonlinear terms are completely determined by the central charge of the Virasoro subalgebra. The wedge algebra corresponds to the conformal group in four dimensions $SO(4,2)$ and therefore, enhanced conformal BMS$_{3}$ can also be regarded as an infinite-dimensional nonlinear extension of the AdS$_{5}$ algebra with nontrivial central extensions. It is worth mentioning that our boundary conditions might be considered as a starting point in order to consistently incorporate either a finite or an infinite number of conformal higher spin fields.

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

A note on one-parameter subgroups of SO(3,2)
hep-th 2025-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

SO(3,2) one-parameter subgroups contain two new types, Id and V, with explicit coordinate transformations yielding new conformal gravity metrics.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 18 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[6]

The (super)conformal BMS$_3$ algebra

O. Fuentealba, H. A. González, A. Pérez, D. Tempo and R. Troncoso, “Superconformal Bondi-Metzner-Sachs Algebra in Three Dimensions,” Phys. Rev. Lett.126, no.9, 091602 (2021) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.091602 [arXiv:2011.08197 [hep-th]]

work page Pith review arXiv 2021
[1]

The Conformal BMS Group

S. J. Haco, S. W. Hawking, M. J. Perry and J. L. Bourjaily, “The Conformal BMS Group,” JHEP 11, 012 (2017) doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2017)012 [arXiv:1701.08110 [hep-th]]

work page Pith review arXiv 2017
[2]

Symmetries at null boundaries: two and three dimensional gravity cases,

H. Adami, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, V. Taghiloo, H. Yavartanoo and C. Zwikel, “Symmetries at null boundaries: two and three dimensional gravity cases,” JHEP10, 107 (2020) doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2020)107 [arXiv:2007.12759 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2020
[3]

Quantum BMS transformations in conformally flat space-times and holography,

L. Donnay, G. Giribet and F. Rosso, “Quantum BMS transformations in conformally flat space-times and holography,” JHEP12, 102 (2020) doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2020)102 [arXiv:2008.05483 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2020
[4]

A canonical realization of the Weyl BMS symmetry,

C. Batlle, V. Campello and J. Gomis, “A canonical realization of the Weyl BMS symmetry,” Phys. Lett. B811, 135920 (2020) doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2020.135920 [arXiv:2008.10290 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2020
[5]

Carrollian conformal scalar as flat-space singleton,

X. Bekaert, A. Campoleoni and S. Pekar, “Carrollian conformal scalar as flat-space singleton,” Phys. Lett. B838, 137734 (2023) doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2023.137734 [arXiv:2211.16498 [hep-th]]

work page arXiv 2023
[7]

Free field realization of the BMS Ising model,

Z. f. Yu and B. Chen, “Free field realization of the BMS Ising model,” JHEP08, 116 (2023) doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2023)116 [arXiv:2211.06926 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2023
[8]

All chiral ${\cal W}$-algebra extensions of $\mathfrak{so}(2,3)$

N. Gupta and N. V. Suryanarayana, “All chiralW-algebra extensions ofso (2, 3),” JHEP 08, 137 (2024) doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2024)137 [arXiv:2304.14938 [hep-th]]. – 6 –

work page Pith review arXiv 2024

Show all 43 references

[9]

ChiralΛ-bms4 symmetry of 3d conformal gravity,

N. Gupta and N. V. Suryanarayana, “ChiralΛ-bms4 symmetry of 3d conformal gravity,” [arXiv:2405.20244 [hep-th]]

arXiv
[10]

Three-dimensional conformal supergravity and Chern-Simons terms,

P. van Nieuwenhuizen, “Three-dimensional conformal supergravity and Chern-Simons terms,” Phys. Rev. D32, 872 (1985) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.32.872

1985 doi
[11]

Conformal Gravity in Three-dimensions as a Gauge Theory,

J. H. Horne and E. Witten, “Conformal Gravity in Three-dimensions as a Gauge Theory,” Phys. Rev. Lett.62, 501-504 (1989) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.62.501

1989 doi
[12]

Conformal Higher Spin in (2+1)-dimensions,

C. N. Pope and P. K. Townsend, “Conformal Higher Spin in (2+1)-dimensions,” Phys. Lett. B 225, 245-250 (1989) doi:10.1016/0370-2693(89)90813-7

1989 doi
[13]

On the Gravitational Interaction of Massless Higher Spin Fields,

E. S. Fradkin and M. A. Vasiliev, “On the Gravitational Interaction of Massless Higher Spin Fields,” Phys. Lett. B189, 89-95 (1987) doi:10.1016/0370-2693(87)91275-5

1987 doi
[14]

New Conformal Higher Spin Gravities in3d,

M. Grigoriev, I. Lovrekovic and E. Skvortsov, “New Conformal Higher Spin Gravities in3d,” JHEP 01, 059 (2020) doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2020)059 [arXiv:1909.13305 [hep-th]]

2020 arXiv
[15]

Towards an exact frame formulation of conformal higher spins in three dimensions,

B. E. W. Nilsson, “Towards an exact frame formulation of conformal higher spins in three dimensions,” JHEP 09 (2015), 078 doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2015)078 [arXiv:1312.5883 [hep-th]]

2015 arXiv
[16]

Higher Spin Conformal Geometry in Three Dimensions and Prepotentials for Higher Spin Gauge Fields,

M. Henneaux, S. Hörtner and A. Leonard, “Higher Spin Conformal Geometry in Three Dimensions and Prepotentials for Higher Spin Gauge Fields,” JHEP01, 073 (2016) doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2016)073 [arXiv:1511.07389 [hep-th]]

2016 arXiv
[17]

The Schouten tensor as a connection in the unfolding of 3D conformal higher-spin fields,

T. Basile, R. Bonezzi and N. Boulanger, “The Schouten tensor as a connection in the unfolding of 3D conformal higher-spin fields,” JHEP04 (2017), 054 doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2017)054 [arXiv:1701.08645 [hep-th]]

2017 arXiv
[18]

Matter-free higher spin gravities in 3D: Partially-massless fields and general structure,

M. Grigoriev, K. Mkrtchyan and E. Skvortsov, “Matter-free higher spin gravities in 3D: Partially-massless fields and general structure,” Phys. Rev. D102 (2020) no.6, 066003 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.066003 [arXiv:2005.05931 [hep-th]]

2020 arXiv
[19]

Generalised superconformal higher-spin multiplets,

S. M. Kuzenko, M. Ponds and E. S. N. Raptakis, “Generalised superconformal higher-spin multiplets,” JHEP 03 (2021), 183 doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2021)183 [arXiv:2011.11300 [hep-th]]

2021 arXiv
[20]

Fractional spins, unfolding, and holography. Part II. 4D higher spin gravity and 3D conformal dual,

F. Diaz, C. Iazeolla and P. Sundell, “Fractional spins, unfolding, and holography. Part II. 4D higher spin gravity and 3D conformal dual,” JHEP10, 066 (2024) doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2024)066 [arXiv:2403.02301 [hep-th]]

2024 arXiv
[21]

Holography of new conformal higher spin gravities in 3d for low spins,

I. Lovrekovic, “Holography of new conformal higher spin gravities in 3d for low spins,” [arXiv:2411.13250 [hep-th]]

arXiv
[22]

The Asymptotic dynamics of three-dimensional Einstein gravity with a negative cosmological constant,

O. Coussaert, M. Henneaux and P. van Driel, “The Asymptotic dynamics of three-dimensional Einstein gravity with a negative cosmological constant,” Class. Quant. Grav. 12, 2961-2966 (1995) doi:10.1088/0264-9381/12/12/012 [arXiv:gr-qc/9506019 [gr-qc]]

1995 arXiv
[23]

Role of Surface Integrals in the Hamiltonian Formulation of General Relativity,

T. Regge and C. Teitelboim, “Role of Surface Integrals in the Hamiltonian Formulation of General Relativity,” Annals Phys.88, 286 (1974) doi:10.1016/0003-4916(74)90404-7

1974 doi
[24]

Covariant theory of asymptotic symmetries, conservation laws and central charges,

G. Barnich and F. Brandt, “Covariant theory of asymptotic symmetries, conservation laws and central charges,” Nucl. Phys. B633, 3-82 (2002) doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(02)00251-1 [arXiv:hep-th/0111246 [hep-th]]

2002 arXiv
[25]

Conformal edge currents in Chern-Simons theories,

A. P. Balachandran, G. Bimonte, K. S. Gupta and A. Stern, “Conformal edge currents in Chern-Simons theories,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A7 (1992), 4655-4670 doi:10.1142/S0217751X92002106 [arXiv:hep-th/9110072 [hep-th]]. – 7 –

1992 arXiv
[26]

Global charges in Chern-Simons field theory and the (2+1) black hole,

M. Banados, “Global charges in Chern-Simons field theory and the (2+1) black hole,” Phys. Rev. D 52 (1996), 5816-5825 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.52.5816 [arXiv:hep-th/9405171 [hep-th]]

1996 arXiv
[27]

Conformal field theory, (2+1)-dimensional gravity, and the BTZ black hole,

S. Carlip, “Conformal field theory, (2+1)-dimensional gravity, and the BTZ black hole,” Class. Quant. Grav.22 (2005), R85-R124 doi:10.1088/0264-9381/22/12/R01 [arXiv:gr-qc/0503022 [gr-qc]]

2005 arXiv
[28]

W symmetry,

P. Bouwknegt and K. Schoutens, “W symmetry,” Adv. Ser. Math. Phys.22, 1-875 (1995)

1995
[29]

W algebras and superalgebras from constrained WZW models: A Group theoretical classification,

L. Frappat, E. Ragoucy and P. Sorba, “W algebras and superalgebras from constrained WZW models: A Group theoretical classification,” Commun. Math. Phys.157, 499-548 (1993) doi:10.1007/BF02096881 [arXiv:hep-th/9207102 [hep-th]]

1993 arXiv
[30]

Cohomology of infinite-dimensional Lie algebras,

D. B. Fuks,“Cohomology of infinite-dimensional Lie algebras,” Springer Science and Business Media, 2012. doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-8765-7

2012 doi
[31]

TheΛ-BMS4 group of dS4 and new boundary conditions for AdS4,

G. Compère, A. Fiorucci and R. Ruzziconi, “TheΛ-BMS4 group of dS4 and new boundary conditions for AdS4,” Class. Quant. Grav.36 (2019) no.19, 195017 [erratum: Class. Quant. Grav. 38 (2021) no.22, 229501] doi:10.1088/1361-6382/ab3d4b [arXiv:1905.00971 [gr-qc]]

2019 arXiv
[32]

Charge algebra in Al(A)dSn spacetimes,

A. Fiorucci and R. Ruzziconi, “Charge algebra in Al(A)dSn spacetimes,” JHEP 05 (2021), 210 doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2021)210 [arXiv:2011.02002 [hep-th]]

2021 arXiv
[33]

Static spherically symmetric solutions for conformal gravity in three dimensions,

J. Oliva, D. Tempo and R. Troncoso, “Static spherically symmetric solutions for conformal gravity in three dimensions,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A24, 1588-1592 (2009) doi:10.1142/S0217751X09045054 [arXiv:0905.1510 [hep-th]]

2009 arXiv
[34]

Three-dimensional black holes, gravitational solitons, kinks and wormholes for BHT massive gravity,

J. Oliva, D. Tempo and R. Troncoso, “Three-dimensional black holes, gravitational solitons, kinks and wormholes for BHT massive gravity,” JHEP07, 011 (2009) doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2009/07/011 [arXiv:0905.1545 [hep-th]]

2009 arXiv
[35]

Holography of New Conformal Higher Spin Gravities in 3d,

I. Lovrekovic, “Holography of New Conformal Higher Spin Gravities in 3d,” [arXiv:2312.12301 [hep-th]]

arXiv
[36]

Chemical potentials in three-dimensional higher spin anti-de Sitter gravity,

M. Henneaux, A. Perez, D. Tempo and R. Troncoso, “Chemical potentials in three-dimensional higher spin anti-de Sitter gravity,” JHEP12, 048 (2013) doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2013)048 [arXiv:1309.4362 [hep-th]]

2013 arXiv
[37]

Generalized Black Holes in Three-dimensional Spacetime,

C. Bunster, M. Henneaux, A. Perez, D. Tempo and R. Troncoso, “Generalized Black Holes in Three-dimensional Spacetime,” JHEP 05, 031 (2014) doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2014)031 [arXiv:1404.3305 [hep-th]]

2014 arXiv
[38]

Spin-3 Gravity in Three-Dimensional Flat Space,

H. Afshar, A. Bagchi, R. Fareghbal, D. Grumiller and J. Rosseel, “Spin-3 Gravity in Three-Dimensional Flat Space,” Phys. Rev. Lett.111, no.12, 121603 (2013) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.121603 [arXiv:1307.4768 [hep-th]]

2013 arXiv
[39]

Asymptotically flat spacetimes in three-dimensional higher spin gravity,

H. A. Gonzalez, J. Matulich, M. Pino and R. Troncoso, “Asymptotically flat spacetimes in three-dimensional higher spin gravity,” JHEP09, 016 (2013) doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2013)016 [arXiv:1307.5651 [hep-th]]

2013 arXiv
[40]

Flat space (higher spin) gravity with chemical potentials,

M. Gary, D. Grumiller, M. Riegler and J. Rosseel, “Flat space (higher spin) gravity with chemical potentials,” JHEP01, 152 (2015) doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2015)152 [arXiv:1411.3728 [hep-th]]

2015 arXiv
[41]

Higher spin extension of cosmological spacetimes in 3D: asymptotically flat behaviour with chemical potentials and thermodynamics,

J. Matulich, A. Perez, D. Tempo and R. Troncoso, “Higher spin extension of cosmological spacetimes in 3D: asymptotically flat behaviour with chemical potentials and thermodynamics,” JHEP 05, 025 (2015) doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2015)025 [arXiv:1412.1464 [hep-th]]. – 8 –

2015 arXiv
[42]

Extension of the Poincaré group with half-integer spin generators: hypergravity and beyond,

O. Fuentealba, J. Matulich and R. Troncoso, “Extension of the Poincaré group with half-integer spin generators: hypergravity and beyond,” JHEP09, 003 (2015) doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2015)003 [arXiv:1505.06173 [hep-th]]

2015 arXiv
[43]

Asymptotically flat structure of hypergravity in three spacetime dimensions,

O. Fuentealba, J. Matulich and R. Troncoso, “Asymptotically flat structure of hypergravity in three spacetime dimensions,” JHEP10, 009 (2015) doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2015)009 [arXiv:1508.04663 [hep-th]]. – 9 –

2015 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [6]

The (super)conformal BMS$_3$ algebra

O. Fuentealba, H. A. González, A. Pérez, D. Tempo and R. Troncoso, “Superconformal Bondi-Metzner-Sachs Algebra in Three Dimensions,” Phys. Rev. Lett.126, no.9, 091602 (2021) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.091602 [arXiv:2011.08197 [hep-th]]

work page Pith review arXiv 2021

[2] [1]

The Conformal BMS Group

S. J. Haco, S. W. Hawking, M. J. Perry and J. L. Bourjaily, “The Conformal BMS Group,” JHEP 11, 012 (2017) doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2017)012 [arXiv:1701.08110 [hep-th]]

work page Pith review arXiv 2017

[3] [2]

Symmetries at null boundaries: two and three dimensional gravity cases,

H. Adami, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, V. Taghiloo, H. Yavartanoo and C. Zwikel, “Symmetries at null boundaries: two and three dimensional gravity cases,” JHEP10, 107 (2020) doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2020)107 [arXiv:2007.12759 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2020

[4] [3]

Quantum BMS transformations in conformally flat space-times and holography,

L. Donnay, G. Giribet and F. Rosso, “Quantum BMS transformations in conformally flat space-times and holography,” JHEP12, 102 (2020) doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2020)102 [arXiv:2008.05483 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2020

[5] [4]

A canonical realization of the Weyl BMS symmetry,

C. Batlle, V. Campello and J. Gomis, “A canonical realization of the Weyl BMS symmetry,” Phys. Lett. B811, 135920 (2020) doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2020.135920 [arXiv:2008.10290 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2020

[6] [5]

Carrollian conformal scalar as flat-space singleton,

X. Bekaert, A. Campoleoni and S. Pekar, “Carrollian conformal scalar as flat-space singleton,” Phys. Lett. B838, 137734 (2023) doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2023.137734 [arXiv:2211.16498 [hep-th]]

work page arXiv 2023

[7] [7]

Free field realization of the BMS Ising model,

Z. f. Yu and B. Chen, “Free field realization of the BMS Ising model,” JHEP08, 116 (2023) doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2023)116 [arXiv:2211.06926 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2023

[8] [8]

All chiral ${\cal W}$-algebra extensions of $\mathfrak{so}(2,3)$

N. Gupta and N. V. Suryanarayana, “All chiralW-algebra extensions ofso (2, 3),” JHEP 08, 137 (2024) doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2024)137 [arXiv:2304.14938 [hep-th]]. – 6 –

work page Pith review arXiv 2024