Universality of Colored Scalars from the Stringy KLT Kernel

Christoph Bartsch; Jaroslav Trnka; Ji\v{r}\'i Novotn\'y; Karol Kampf

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 41 references

Universality of Colored Scalars from the Stringy KLT Kernel

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The inverse string KLT kernel, evaluated under a kinematic α'-shift, reproduces pion, scalar, and mixed amplitudes from one function.

desk verdict A genuinely new alpha-prime shift unifies BAS, NLSM, and mixed amplitudes through the diagonal inverse KLT kernel, but the general equivalence rests on an unproven factorization identity (18) that needs a proof or higher-n verification. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.01501 v1 pith:ZP74MM2J submitted 2025-05-02 hep-th

Christoph Bartsch , Karol Kampf , Jiří Novotný , Jaroslav Trnka This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-th

keywords inverseKLTkernelbi-adjointscalaramplitudesnonlinearsigmamodelpionmixedNLSM-phi3alpha-primeshiftabelianizationdoublecopy

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This letter claims that amplitudes of three seemingly distinct theories are actually the same object. The bi-adjoint scalar (BAS) amplitudes, pions of the nonlinear $\sigma$ model (NLSM), and mixed NLSM+$φ^{3}$ amplitudes can all be obtained from the diagonal element $m_{\alpha'}[1|1]$ of the inverse string-theory KLT kernel, evaluated at different kinematic points. The operation that converts scalars into pions is the $\alpha'$-shift: rescale $\alpha'\to\alpha'/2$ and shift even-multiplicity Mandelstam variables by $\pm 1/\alpha'$. If the claim is correct, cubic colored scalars and pions are interchangeable in a common stringy framework, and the inverse KLT kernel becomes a generating function for whole families of field-theory amplitudes.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is $m_{\alpha'}[1|1]$, the diagonal matrix element of the inverse string KLT kernel, which is a rational function built from propagators $t_{ij}^{-1}=\cot(\pi\alpha' X_{ij})$ and odd-point vertices. The mechanism is abelianization with half-angle variables $\tau_{ij}=\tan(\tfrac{\pi}{2}\alpha' X_{ij})$: trigonometric identities turn sums over permutations into factorized products, and the formal replacement $1/t_{\rm even}\to -\tau_{\rm even}$, $1/t_{\rm odd}\to 1/\tau_{\rm odd}$ is implemented exactly by the $\alpha'$-shift. This shift, together with the sign ambiguity coming from $\tan(x\pm \pi/2)=-\cot x$, is what makes scalars and pions the same function evaluated differently.

What would settle it

Compute the eight-point diagonal inverse KLT element $m_{\alpha'}^{8}[1|1]$ and the abelianized function $A_8^{\alpha'}$ directly from the definition (5), then compare with the shifted matrix element in (23) at finite $\alpha'$; any disagreement falsifies the central equivalence. A second, sharper test is to verify the factorized product form (18) explicitly for one eight- or ten-point diagram topology.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is the chain of equalities $$\mathrm{BAS}_{\$\alpha$'} = \mathrm{NLSM}_{\$\alpha$'} = (\mathrm{NLSM}+\mathrm{BAS})_{\$\alpha$'} = \mathrm{KLT}^{-1}_{\$\alpha$'},$$ understood as follows. After abelianization, which sums the inverse KLT matrix elements over one ordering, every diagram topology collapses to a product of factors in which even-particle channels move to the numerator and odd-particle channels stay in the denominator. This replacement is realized by a kinematic shift, so the abelianized function is literally the diagonal inverse KLT matrix element on shifted kinematics. The same reasoning, applied to semi-abelianization, produces stringy mixed amplitudes; for three-scalar mixed functions the shift and the semi-abelianization agree exactly, while for four or more scalars they agree at leading order in $\alpha'$.

Load-bearing premise

The entire construction rests on the factorization identity (18) for abelianized diagram topologies, which the paper states without proof; if it fails at any multiplicity, the replacement rules and the $\alpha'$-shift equivalence would not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Even-point NLSM pion amplitudes acquire a rational stringy completion that keeps the Adler zero and odd-pole factorization at finite $\alpha'$.
Mixed NLSM+$\phi^3$ amplitudes with three adjacent scalars are exactly the shifted diagonal inverse KLT kernel, so they inherit its monodromy relations.
For four or more scalars, the $\alpha'$-shift and semi-abelianization produce the same field-theory mixed amplitudes at leading order, with corrections that differ at higher order in $\alpha'$.
Because the $\alpha'$-shift is invertible, the equivalence is exact in both directions: pions can be converted back into scalars by the inverse shift.
The monodromy relations of the inverse KLT kernel imply hidden zeros and monodromy zeros for the stringy pion functions, providing explicit rational examples for studying these structures.

Reading between the lines

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

The formal closeness of the $\alpha'$-shift to the $\delta$-shift suggests both are manifestations of a single kinematic deformation, and reconciling their sign prescriptions could reveal a deeper source of the pion-scalar equivalence.
If the equivalence holds at all multiplicities, the ABHY associahedron geometry of BAS amplitudes should extend through the $\alpha'$-shift to pions and mixed amplitudes, giving them a positive-geometry formulation.
The authors' remark that the connection extends to loop integrands, if borne out, would turn the inverse KLT kernel into a loop-level generating function, a direct testable extension of the claim.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

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

The new thing here is the alpha-prime shift: take the diagonal inverse KLT matrix element, rescale alpha-prime to alpha-prime/2, shift even-channel X variables by plus or minus 1/alpha-prime, and you get the abelianized pion function. That is a concrete and surprising result. It is distinct from the earlier delta-shift and from abelianized Z-functions, and the paper shows explicitly that one rational function encodes BAS, pions, and mixed amplitudes. The trigonometric mechanism is exact, and the four-, five-, six-, and nine-point checks are consistent. The sign ambiguity in the shift, which the delta-shift lacks, is also a nice observation.

The paper deserves credit for what it proves directly. The abelianized six-point function (15) and the comparison with the known NLSM amplitude are clean. The mixed three-scalar examples work, and the fact that the shift reproduces the nine-point mixed amplitude that the delta-shift cannot reach is a genuine plus. Citation practice is fine: the inverse KLT kernel is an existing object, and the paper uses known NLSM amplitudes as benchmarks rather than fitting anything.

Now the soft spots, in proportion. The load-bearing problem is identity (18). It says abelianizing any diagram topology gives a product over even channels of (1/t_even - 1/s_even) and odd channels of (1/t_odd + 1/s_odd), with no residual topology-dependent coefficients. That is a strong claim, and the paper defers the proof to an intersection-number argument. The six-point snowflake diagram already produces a -1/3 tau13 tau35 tau15 term, and the paper does not show how (18) yields that coefficient. If (18) needs extra factors at higher n, the replacement rules (19), the alpha-prime shift (22), and the headline equivalence (23) would not hold in general. This is the main reason to call the paper conditional rather than fully established.

The low-energy limit (9) for all even n is asserted rather than proven; the examples support it, but the general statement is not shown. The mixed case with four or more scalars matches semi-abelianization only at leading order in alpha-prime, as the authors acknowledge in (31). That limits the universality claim, but it is not a contradiction.

Who should read this: anyone working on scalar and pion amplitudes, stringy completions, the double copy, or hidden zeros. The paper should get a serious referee. The revision should require a proof of (18), or at minimum symbolic verification through n = 8 or 10, plus a clear statement of which parts of the universality claim are proved and which are conjectural. On current evidence, I would accept after that condition is met.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies the inverse string KLT kernel m_{α'}[σ|ρ] and defines abelianized functions A_{2k}^{α'} by summing the kernel over one ordering (Eq. 5). It argues that, for even multiplicity, these functions are stringy completions of NLSM pion amplitudes (Eqs. 9 and 10), and that a kinematic α'-shift, X_even → X_even ± 1/α' together with α' → α'/2, turns the diagonal inverse KLT matrix element m_{α'}[1|1] into the abelianized pion function (Eq. 23). The same shift is then applied to odd-point diagonal kernels to produce certain mixed NLSM+φ^3 amplitudes; for exactly three scalars the shifted function agrees with semi-abelianization up to nine points, while for four or more scalars only the leading-order low-energy amplitude agrees (Eqs. 30 and 31). The paper provides explicit four-, five-, six-, and nine-point checks and emphasizes the rational, trigonometric form of all quantities.

Significance. If the central equivalence (23) is established, the paper would provide a single rational stringy function from which BAS amplitudes, NLSM pion amplitudes, and mixed amplitudes all arise by a simple kinematic shift, complementing the δ-shift of Arkani-Hamed et al. and giving a concrete testing ground for hidden zeros and monodromy properties. The explicit four-, five-, six-, and nine-point examples are concrete and checkable, and the α'-shift mechanism is elegant. However, the general statement rests on an unproven factorization identity, Eq. (18), and the general NLSM identification (9) is asserted beyond the worked examples. These gaps are load-bearing for the headline universality claim, so the paper in its current form is not yet fully established, but the core idea is plausible and worth pursuing.

major comments (3)

[Section III, Eq. (18)] The factorization identity (18) is stated without proof and is load-bearing for the paper's central claim. It asserts that abelianizing any diagram topology yields a product over even channels of (-τ_even) and odd channels of 1/τ_odd, with no topology-dependent overall coefficient. The six-point example in Eq. (15) contains a snowflake contribution -(1/3)τ13τ35τ15, and the paper does not demonstrate that (18) reproduces this coefficient; in fact, the text only says that the sum over permutations of the snowflake topology yields that term. Since (18) justifies the replacement rules (19), which in turn generate the α'-shift and the central equivalence (23), the universality claim for pure pion amplitudes is not established unless (18) is proven or at least verified symbolically at higher multiplicities. The sentence 'can be proven from the intersection number interpretation' is not a proof; please provide the proof or a precise derivation with a specific citation to the relevant part of Ref. [16].
[Section III, Eq. (9)] The claim that the low-energy limit of A_{2k}^{α'} is the NLSM pion amplitude for all even n is asserted rather than derived. The text explicitly demonstrates only the four-point case (6) and the six-point case (15), and Eq. (10) is presented as a schematic structure rather than a proven statement. This identification is the physical content of the abelianization procedure, so without a general argument the statement 'This holds true more generally' goes beyond the evidence shown. Please provide a proof of (9), for example by combining the factorization identity (18) with known representations of NLSM amplitudes, or clearly label (9) as a conjecture supported by the checked multiplicities.
[Section V, Eq. (31)] For mixed amplitudes with four or more scalars, the α'-shift and semi-abelianization agree only at leading order in α'; Eq. (31) explicitly shows a mismatch at O(τ), e.g. M_{6,abel}^{α'} = (1/2) M_{6,shift}^{α'} + O(τ). The abstract and introduction claim that 'all these amplitudes can be viewed as equivalent' and display the chain BAS = NLSM = (NLSM+BAS) = KLT^{-1}, which suggests an exact equivalence of stringy functions. As written, the mixed-case equivalence holds for the low-energy amplitude only, not for the full α'-dependent functions when n_φ ≥ 4. Please qualify the universality claim to state precisely that for n_φ ≥ 4 the equality is understood at the level of the leading low-energy amplitude, or explain why the O(τ) mismatch is irrelevant to the proposed universality.

minor comments (5)

[Section III, Eq. (18)] The product notation in Eq. (18) is easy to misread: the right-hand side currently reads 'Q(-τ_even)Q τ_odd', which could be read as a single product of (-τ_even) with τ_odd. Please spell out that the first product runs over even channels with factors (-τ_even) and the second product runs over odd channels with factors 1/τ_odd.
[Section II, Eq. (4)] The diagrammatic sum in Eq. (4) is described in words, but the diagrams themselves are not reproduced in the submitted text. Please include the figure or a clear list of the contributing topologies, since the subsequent discussion refers to specific diagrams such as the first and the snowflake topology.
[Section III, Eqs. (15) and (16)] The notation 'cyc.' is used without definition. Please state explicitly that the cyclic permutations refer to cyclic rotations of the external labels, as is standard in the amplitudes literature.
[Section V, Eqs. (24) and (28)] The notation for mixed amplitudes is not uniform: Eq. (24) writes M5(φππφφ), Eq. (28) writes M^{3,α'}_5, and Eq. (25) uses M^{n_φ,α'}_n. Please define the normalization and index conventions consistently, including the prefactor in the semi-abelianization (25) compared with the abelianization (5), where a factor 1/2 appears in one but not the other.
[Section III, statement after Eq. (18)] The sentence 'The factorized form (18) can be proven from the intersection number interpretation of inverse KLT matrix elements' cites Ref. [16] but gives no theorem, equation, or section number. Since this proof is essential to the main argument, please provide a specific pointer or a short derivation in an appendix.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the alpha'-shift equivalence is derived from an independent input; the unproven factorization identity (18) is a correctness gap, not a circular step.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The inverse stringy KLT kernel m^alpha'_n is the independent input, taken from Mizera's work [15,16] with explicit matrix elements quoted in (1); no parameter is fitted. The abelianized functions A^alpha'_n are defined by the linear summation (5), and the low-energy match to NLSM amplitudes is verified against known four- and six-point amplitudes, e.g. (16) from [19], which serve as external benchmarks rather than as inputs. The central equivalence (23) follows algebraically from the replacement rules (19), which in turn are consequences of the factorization identity (18). The paper explicitly states that (18) 'can be proven from the intersection number [16] interpretation' but that the proof 'goes beyond the scope of this letter'; because (18) is asserted, not derived from the paper's conclusions, this is an omitted proof and a correctness risk, not a circular step. In particular, the -1/3 snowflake coefficient in (15) is not shown to follow from (18), so the generality of (18) at higher multiplicities is a legitimate gap. Self-citations such as [19] and [22] are used as benchmarks or background and are not load-bearing. No circularity is identified.

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

No free parameters are fitted; alpha-prime is the string scale input and all shifts are kinematic transformations. The paper rests on the known inverse KLT kernel as background and on one new unproved factorization lemma (18), plus asserted regularities for general n.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Inverse KLT matrix elements m_{alpha'}[sigma|rho] have the explicit rational form and diagram expansion from Mizera.
Used as the starting input in Sections II-V; taken from prior literature [15,16].
ad hoc to paper Equation (18): abelianizing any diagram topology gives a product of (-tau_even) and 1/tau_odd factors.
Stated in Section III and attributed to an intersection-number proof that is not included; this is the paper's own unproved lemma.
domain assumption The leading low-energy limit of abelianized functions is the NLSM amplitude for all even n (Eq. 9).
Section III states this holds more generally, but only four- and six-point examples are shown; the central claim relies on this regularity.
domain assumption For mixed amplitudes with four or more scalars, the alpha-prime shift follows the delta-shift pattern of [7] and is verified only up to ten points.
Section V reports checks up to ten points with six scalars, not a general argument; the finite-alpha-prime discrepancy in Eq. (31) makes this a weaker part of the paper.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Universality of Colored Scalars from the Stringy KLT Kernel." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZP74MM2J

@misc{pith2026250501501,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Universality of Colored Scalars from the Stringy KLT Kernel},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZP74MM2J}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.01501}
}

abstract

A new perspective on the inverse string theory Kawai-Lewellen-Tye (KLT) kernel is provided which establishes the universality of scattering amplitudes in the bi-adjoint scalar (BAS) theory, pions in the Non-linear sigma model (NLSM), and mixed amplitudes (NLSM+$\phi^3$) recently studied in the literature. We show that all these amplitudes can be viewed as equivalent, arising from a single function, the inverse string theory KLT kernel, evaluated at different kinematic points. In this way cubic colored scalars and pions become interchangeable through a procedure we call the $\alpha'$-shift. The latter complements the $\delta$-shift proposed by Arkani-Hamed et al., and demonstrates an inherent equivalence of scattering amplitudes in different quantum field theories by embedding them in a common stringy framework.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages

[16]

N. E. J. Bjerrum-Bohr, P. H. Damgaard, T. Sondergaard, and P. Vanhove, JHEP 01, 001 (2011), arXiv:1010.3933 [hep-th]

arXiv 2011
[1]

Arkani-Hamed, H

N. Arkani-Hamed, H. Frost, and G. Salvatori, (2024), arXiv:2412.21027 [hep-th]

arXiv 2024
[2]

Arkani-Hamed, Q

N. Arkani-Hamed, Q. Cao, J. Dong, C. Figueiredo, and S. He, JHEP 04, 078 (2025), arXiv:2401.00041 [hep-th]

arXiv 2025
[3]

Arkani-Hamed, Q

N. Arkani-Hamed, Q. Cao, J. Dong, C. Figueiredo, and S. He, (2024), arXiv:2408.11891 [hep-th]

arXiv 2024
[4]

Arkani-Hamed, C

N. Arkani-Hamed, C. Figueiredo, H. Frost, and G. Sal- vatori, (2024), arXiv:2402.06719 [hep-th]

arXiv 2024
[5]

Arkani-Hamed, Q

N. Arkani-Hamed, Q. Cao, J. Dong, C. Figueiredo, and S. He, JHEP 10, 231 (2024), arXiv:2312.16282 [hep-th]

arXiv 2024
[6]

Arkani-Hamed and C

N. Arkani-Hamed and C. Figueiredo, (2024), arXiv:2403.04826 [hep-th]

arXiv 2024
[7]

For our purposes we then replace δ→± 1/α′ where we are free to choose signs thanks to (20)

for the δ-shift regarding which X-variables need to be shifted to obtain a given mixed amplitude. For our purposes we then replace δ→± 1/α′ where we are free to choose signs thanks to (20). In addition, we always apply a rescaling α′7→α′/2 as in the case of (21). Three Scalars The first set of stringy mixed func- tions we study are those with n = 2k + 1 o...

work page

Show all 41 references

[8]

Broedel, O

J. Broedel, O. Schlotterer, and S. Stieberger, Fortsch. Phys. 61, 812 (2013), arXiv:1304.7267 [hep-th]

2013 arXiv
[9]

Arkani-Hamed, Q

N. Arkani-Hamed, Q. Cao, J. Dong, C. Figueiredo, and S. He, Phys. Rev. D 110, 065018 (2024), arXiv:2401.05483 [hep-th]

2024 arXiv
[10]

J. J. M. Carrasco, C. R. Mafra, and O. Schlotterer, JHEP 08, 135 (2017), arXiv:1612.06446 [hep-th]

2017 arXiv
[11]

C. R. Mafra and O. Schlotterer, JHEP 01, 031 (2017), arXiv:1609.07078 [hep-th]

2017 arXiv
[12]

Z. Bern, J. J. Carrasco, M. Chiodaroli, H. Johans- son, and R. Roiban, J. Phys. A 57, 333002 (2024), arXiv:1909.01358 [hep-th]

2024 arXiv
[13]

J. J. M. Carrasco, C. R. Mafra, and O. Schlotterer, JHEP 06, 093 (2017), arXiv:1608.02569 [hep-th]

2017 arXiv
[14]

Kawai, D

H. Kawai, D. C. Lewellen, and S. H. H. Tye, Nucl. Phys. B 269, 1 (1986)

1986
[15]

the five-point contact term in (1))

(c.f. the five-point contact term in (1)). In fact, diag- onal matrix elements mα′ n [1|1] can be computed as sums over all Feynman diagrams constructed from the given odd-point vertices and propagators t−1 ij . For instance, at six points, the diagonal matrix element is schem...
[17]

Mizera, JHEP 06, 084 (2017), arXiv:1610.04230 [hep- th]

S. Mizera, JHEP 06, 084 (2017), arXiv:1610.04230 [hep- th]

2017 arXiv
[18]

Mizera, JHEP 08, 097 (2017), arXiv:1706.08527 [hep- th]

S. Mizera, JHEP 08, 097 (2017), arXiv:1706.08527 [hep- th]

2017 arXiv
[19]

Cachazo, S

F. Cachazo, S. He, and E. Y. Yuan, JHEP 07, 033 (2014), arXiv:1309.0885 [hep-th]

2014 arXiv
[20]

S. L. Adler, Phys. Rev. 137, B1022 (1965)

1965
[21]

Kampf, J

K. Kampf, J. Novotny, and J. Trnka, JHEP 05, 032 (2013), arXiv:1304.3048 [hep-th]

2013 arXiv
[22]

Cachazo, P

F. Cachazo, P. Cha, and S. Mizera, JHEP 06, 170 (2016), arXiv:1604.03893

2016 arXiv
[23]

Y. Li, D. Roest, and T. ter Veldhuis, JHEP 04, 121 (2025), arXiv:2403.12939 [hep-th]

2025
[24]

Bartsch, T

C. Bartsch, T. V. Brown, K. Kampf, U. Oktem, S. Paran- jape, and J. Trnka, Phys. Rev. D 111, 045019 (2025), arXiv:2403.10594 [hep-th]

2025 arXiv
[25]

D’Adda, S

A. D’Adda, S. Sciuto, R. D’Auria, and F. Gliozzi, Nuovo Cim. A 5, 421 (1971)

1971
[26]

Q. Cao, J. Dong, S. He, and C. Shi, Phys. Lett. B 856, 138934 (2024), arXiv:2403.08855 [hep-th]

2024 arXiv
[27]

Arkani-Hamed, Y

N. Arkani-Hamed, Y. Bai, S. He, and G. Yan, JHEP 05, 096 (2018), arXiv:1711.09102 [hep-th]

2018 arXiv
[28]

Paranjape, M

S. Paranjape, M. Skowronek, M. Spradlin, and A. Volovich, (2025), arXiv:2504.11253 [hep-th]

2025 arXiv
[29]

Cheung, K

C. Cheung, K. Kampf, J. Novotny, and J. Trnka, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 221602 (2015), arXiv:1412.4095 [hep-th]

2015 arXiv
[30]

Cheung, K

C. Cheung, K. Kampf, J. Novotny, C.-H. Shen, and J. Trnka, JHEP 02, 020 (2017), arXiv:1611.03137 [hep- th]

2017 arXiv
[31]

Elvang, M

H. Elvang, M. Hadjiantonis, C. R. T. Jones, and S. Paranjape, JHEP 01, 195 (2019), arXiv:1806.06079 [hep-th]

2019 arXiv
[32]

Kampf, J

K. Kampf, J. Novotny, M. Shifman, and J. Trnka, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 111601 (2020), arXiv:1910.04766 [hep- th]

2020 arXiv
[33]

H.-H. Chi, H. Elvang, A. Herderschee, C. R. T. Jones, and S. Paranjape, JHEP 03, 077 (2022), arXiv:2106.12600 [hep-th]

2022 arXiv
[34]

Cheung, A

C. Cheung, A. Helset, and J. Parra-Martinez, JHEP 04, 011 (2022), arXiv:2111.03045 [hep-th]

2022 arXiv
[35]

T. V. Brown, K. Kampf, U. Oktem, S. Paranjape, and J. Trnka, Phys. Rev. D 108, 105008 (2023), arXiv:2305.05688 [hep-th]

2023 arXiv
[36]

Kampf, J

K. Kampf, J. Novotny, M. Shifman, and J. Trnka, JHEP 01, 009 (2025), arXiv:2409.09534 [hep-th]

2025 arXiv
[37]

Bartsch, K

C. Bartsch, K. Kampf, J. Novotny, and J. Trnka, Phys. Rev. D 110, 045009 (2024), arXiv:2401.04731 [hep-th]

2024 arXiv
[38]

Y. Li, T. Wang, T. Brauner, and D. Roest, (2024), arXiv:2412.14858 [hep-th]

2024
[39]

Arkani-Hamed and C

N. Arkani-Hamed and C. Figueiredo, (2024), arXiv:2405.09608 [hep-th]

2024 arXiv
[40]

Rodina, Phys

L. Rodina, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 031601 (2025), arXiv:2406.04234 [hep-th]

2025 arXiv
[41]

J. V. Backus and L. Rodina, (2025), arXiv:2503.03805 [hep-th]

2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [16]

N. E. J. Bjerrum-Bohr, P. H. Damgaard, T. Sondergaard, and P. Vanhove, JHEP 01, 001 (2011), arXiv:1010.3933 [hep-th]

arXiv 2011

[2] [1]

Arkani-Hamed, H

N. Arkani-Hamed, H. Frost, and G. Salvatori, (2024), arXiv:2412.21027 [hep-th]

arXiv 2024

[3] [2]

Arkani-Hamed, Q

N. Arkani-Hamed, Q. Cao, J. Dong, C. Figueiredo, and S. He, JHEP 04, 078 (2025), arXiv:2401.00041 [hep-th]

arXiv 2025

[4] [3]

Arkani-Hamed, Q

N. Arkani-Hamed, Q. Cao, J. Dong, C. Figueiredo, and S. He, (2024), arXiv:2408.11891 [hep-th]

arXiv 2024

[5] [4]

Arkani-Hamed, C

N. Arkani-Hamed, C. Figueiredo, H. Frost, and G. Sal- vatori, (2024), arXiv:2402.06719 [hep-th]

arXiv 2024

[6] [5]

Arkani-Hamed, Q

N. Arkani-Hamed, Q. Cao, J. Dong, C. Figueiredo, and S. He, JHEP 10, 231 (2024), arXiv:2312.16282 [hep-th]

arXiv 2024

[7] [6]

Arkani-Hamed and C

N. Arkani-Hamed and C. Figueiredo, (2024), arXiv:2403.04826 [hep-th]

arXiv 2024

[8] [7]

For our purposes we then replace δ→± 1/α′ where we are free to choose signs thanks to (20)

for the δ-shift regarding which X-variables need to be shifted to obtain a given mixed amplitude. For our purposes we then replace δ→± 1/α′ where we are free to choose signs thanks to (20). In addition, we always apply a rescaling α′7→α′/2 as in the case of (21). Three Scalars The first set of stringy mixed func- tions we study are those with n = 2k + 1 o...

work page