Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 4 minor 51 references

Elliptical Wilson loops in ${\cal N}=4$ Super Yang-Mills

T0 review · 1 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that a direct Nambu-Goto perturbative solution yields the elliptical Wilson-loop minimal area to order ε¹⁰, matching the Polyakov-action series, and that the one-loop weak-coupling correction follows a parallel ε-series.

desk verdict Solid perturbative computation: the strong-coupling area matches Dekel to O(epsilon^10), but the real novelty is the Nambu-Goto method and the new weak-coupling W1 series; the unproven regularity condition is the main caveat. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.04355 v2 pith:X7ANCC7C submitted 2025-09-04 hep-th hep-ph

Thales Azevedo , Alfonso Ballon-Bayona , Leonardo Pazito This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thhep-ph
keywords ellipticalWilsonloopsN=4superYang-MillsAdS/CFTcorrespondenceminimalsurfacesNambu-Gotoactioneccentricityexpansionholographic
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 tries to establish that the full expectation value of a slightly elliptical Wilson loop in planar N=4 super Yang-Mills can be computed analytically as a power series in the eccentricity ε, on both sides of the AdS/CFT duality. At strong coupling, the authors develop a new perturbative scheme that solves the Nambu-Goto equations for the minimal surface in Euclidean AdS3 directly, rather than using the conformal-gauge Polyakov formalism. The regularized area they obtain matches, order by order up to ε¹⁰, the area previously computed from the Polyakov action; the match serves as a nontrivial check of the new method and of the divergence cancellation against the ellipse perimeter. At weak coupling, they evaluate the one-loop term W1 in the same ε-series, and both expansions have no ε² correction, so the first eccentricity effect appears at ε⁴. The result matters because minimal surfaces in AdS underly not only Wilson loops but also holographic entanglement entropy, so a practical perturbative solution for deformed circular contours opens a route to other observables.

What carries the argument

The central object is the surface embedding ρ(y,θ), the radial coordinate of the worldsheet in Euclidean AdS3 as a function of the bulk-depth coordinate y = z/z⋆ and the angular coordinate θ. The ansatz expands ρ(y,θ) = ρ0(y) + Σ_{n≥1} ε^{2n} ρ_{2n}(y,θ), with each ρ_{2n} decomposed into cos(2kθ) Fourier modes; substituting into the Nambu-Goto Euler-Lagrange equation turns each order into linear inhomogeneous ODEs of the form [D − 4k²y] ρ_{2n,2k} = ζ_{2n,2k}, where D = y⁻²(1−y⁴)∂_y + y(1−y²)²∂_y². The maximal depth z⋆ is itself expanded in ε², and the requirement that the ρ modes remain regular at y=1—no tanh⁻¹(y) divergences—fixes the integration constants and the z⋆ coefficients. The regul

What would settle it

Compute the O(ε¹²) term of Areg with this method and compare it with the ε¹² term obtained by extending the Polyakov-action expansion; disagreement would show the regularity condition selects the wrong branch. Alternatively, solve the full nonlinear minimal-surface equation numerically for ε≈0.6–0.7 and check whether the minimized area lies on the series (3.48).

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The authors establish that the strong-coupling expectation value of a small-eccentricity elliptical Wilson loop in planar N=4 SYM is controlled by a minimal surface in Euclidean AdS3 whose regularized area is Areg = −2π − 3πε⁴/16 − 3πε⁶/16 − 897πε⁸/5120 − 417πε¹⁰/2560 + O(ε¹²). They obtain this by solving the Nambu-Goto equations perturbatively in ε², with the radial profile decomposed into Fourier modes in the angular coordinate. The solution requires a maximal-depth z⋆ that itself has an ε² expansion; the requirement that the perturbed surface be regular at the deepest point fixes the integration constants. The resulting series matches, order by order to O(ε¹⁰), the area computed earlier v

Load-bearing premise

The argument depends on assuming the perturbed minimal surface stays smooth at its deepest point, because that regularity condition—not the equations of motion—fixes the integration constants and the maximal-depth expansion; the paper notes the smoothness still needs rigorous proof.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The strong-coupling area series confirms the classical equivalence between the Nambu-Goto and Polyakov formulations for this contour, since the two derivations agree to order ε¹⁰.
  • The absence of an ε² term in both Areg and W1 means the first eccentricity correction appears only at ε⁴; if the pattern persists, the logarithm of the Wilson loop starts at ε⁴ at every coupling.
  • The method reduces each order of the nonlinear minimal-surface problem to linear inhomogeneous ODEs in the Fourier modes, so any smooth deformation of the circle with the same π-rotational symmetry can be treated by the same expansion.
  • The explicit surface parametrization shows the effective eccentricity decreases toward the interior of AdS, so the elliptical contour 'rounds off' in the bulk.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The regularity-at-y=1 condition is doing the work of selecting the solution branch; if it is not rigorously justified for more general contours, the method's predictions for non-elliptical shapes should be treated as conditional until checked.
  • Because the same area functional computes holographic entanglement entropy, the perturbative surface here can likely be recycled to derive the small-eccentricity expansion of entanglement entropy for elliptical boundary regions; the paper does not mention this application.
  • The coincidence of vanishing ε² in weak and strong coupling suggests a coupling-independent extremal property of the circle contour; a two-loop computation would test whether it holds beyond one loop.
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

1 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the vacuum expectation value of an elliptical Wilson loop in planar N=4 super Yang-Mills for small eccentricity epsilon. At weak coupling, the authors compute the O(lambda) term W1 by expanding the two-point-function integral in epsilon, obtaining (3.10), which has no epsilon^2 term. At strong coupling, using AdS/CFT, they formulate the minimal surface in EAdS3 in cylindrical coordinates and introduce a perturbative expansion rho = sum epsilon^{2n} rho_{2n}(y,theta) with y = z/z*. The circular solution is the leading term. Each order reduces, after Fourier decomposition, to ODEs of the form (D - 4k^2 y) rho_{2n,2k} = source. Integration constants and the z* coefficients are fixed by boundary conditions at y=0 and by imposing regularity/closure at y=1. The regularized area is computed to O(epsilon^10), Eq. (3.48), and agrees exactly with Dekel's independent Polyakov-action result, Eq. (4.5).

Significance. If the derivation is accepted, the paper offers a new systematic method for perturbing circular minimal surfaces in AdS directly from the Nambu-Goto equations, provides explicit surface embeddings, and confirms the area expansion by an independent method. The strengths are explicit high-order solutions in Appendix B, an order-by-order demonstration of divergence cancellation, exact agreement with Dekel to O(epsilon^10), and a transparent weak-coupling expansion. The main caveat is the unproved regularity condition at y=1, which fixes the otherwise underdetermined integration constants and the z* expansion.

major comments (1)
  1. [Sec. 3.3.4, App. B, Eq. (3.48)] The linear systems (3.26)-(3.27), (3.37), and the corresponding equations in Appendix B are underdetermined by the Dirichlet data at y=0 alone. The k=0 homogeneous modes contain tanh^{-1}(y)/sqrt(1-y^2) branches; the authors set their coefficients to zero and fix z_{2n} by imposing lim_{y->1} rho_{2n,0}=0. The paper itself notes in Sec. 4 that this smoothness 'needs to be rigorously demonstrated.' Since the area coefficients (3.48) depend on these choices, the derivation is conditional rather than fully deductive. Exact agreement with Dekel's independent computation is strong evidence for the selected branch, but it does not prove uniqueness or validity for general contours. I ask the authors to either prove the required regularity from the original boundary value problem, or explicitly state it as a selection criterion and discuss the possible physical origin of the condition.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (3.45)] The term '30 2' should read '30 y^2'.
  2. [Eqs. (B.15), (B.29)] The displayed formulas have unbalanced parentheses; the closing parenthesis for the numerator polynomial is missing.
  3. [General] The spelling 'Kruczenski' is inconsistent; the reference name should be uniform.
  4. [Sec. 4] The statement that the vanishing epsilon^2 term is a 'prevalent characteristic' would benefit from a precise citation to the relevant examples in [1].

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: area computed from PDE with explicitly stated boundary/regularity conditions; agreement with Dekel is an independent check.

full rationale

The strong-coupling area is computed by solving the Nambu-Goto equations (3.17) perturbatively in ε^2, with boundary conditions from the ellipse parameterization (3.4) and an explicit closure condition ρ(1,θ)=0. The undetermined constants z_{2n}, c_{2n,k} are fixed by the extra regularity requirement that ρ_{2n,0} remain finite as y→1 (tanh^{-1} divergences removed) and by the requirement that ρ_{2n,0}(1)=0, as described in Secs. 3.3.4 and Appendix B. This is an imposed analyticity condition, not a fit to the final area; the paper itself flags in Sec. 4 that smoothness 'needs to be rigorously demonstrated.' The resulting area (3.48) is then compared with Dekel's independent Polyakov-action computation (4.5) after a parameter mapping (4.4); the exact agreement is a nontrivial cross-check, not an input. The weak-coupling coefficient W1 (3.10) is obtained by direct integration of the double integral (3.8), with no fitted parameters. The conjectured λ^2 dependence in (5.1) is explicitly labeled as an expectation. There are no load-bearing self-citations by the present authors, and no uniqueness theorem is imported from prior work of the same authors.

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

No free parameters are fitted to data. The calculation relies on standard holographic and perturbative assumptions. The main ad hoc input is the regularity condition at y=1 and the assumed form of the ε-expansion.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption AdS/CFT correspondence maps the Wilson loop VEV to the minimal-area worldsheet in AdS5 at strong coupling
    Used in Sec. 2.2 to replace the path integral by the classical saddle point. Standard in the field, but an unproved background assumption.
  • domain assumption The minimal surface for a planar contour lies in an AdS3 hyperbolic subspace
    Sec. 3.3.1. Relies on symmetry of the planar ellipse, standard.
  • ad hoc to paper The maximal depth z⋆ admits an analytic even-power expansion in ε and all perturbative modes have the Fourier form (3.19)
    Sec. 3.3.1 and Eq. (3.19). Motivated by symmetry, but the convergence and completeness of the expansion are not proven.
  • ad hoc to paper Perturbative corrections must be regular at y=1 (no tanh^{-1} divergences), which fixes integration constants
    Sec. 3.3.4. The paper acknowledges in Sec. 4 that this smoothness needs rigorous demonstration.
  • standard math Weak-coupling propagator identities and Feynman gauge formulas for N=4 SYM
    Sec. 2.1, Eqs. (2.3)-(2.5). Standard QFT results.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Elliptical Wilson loops in ${\cal N}=4$ Super Yang-Mills." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/X7ANCC7C

@misc{pith2026250904355,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Elliptical Wilson loops in $\cal N=4$ Super Yang-Mills},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/X7ANCC7C}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.04355}
}
abstract

We investigate elliptical Wilson loops in ${\cal N}=4$ Super Yang--Mills theory at weak and strong coupling for small values of the eccentricity. We obtain analytical results for the vacuum expectation value of the Wilson loop in the form of a series in the eccentricity parameter. At weak coupling, we use perturbation theory in ${\cal N}=4$ Super Yang--Mills. At strong coupling, we use the AdS/CFT correspondence, which maps the Wilson loop to the minimal-area worldsheet of an open string in AdS space. We present a novel perturbative method to solve the Nambu--Goto equations allowing us to describe the minimal surface in terms of a coordinate parameterization in Euclidean AdS$_3$. Our results for the regularized area agree with those obtained by Dekel in [1] based on the Polyakov action.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Wilson Loops and Minimal Surfaces Beyond the Wavy Approximation

    A. Dekel, “Wilson Loops and Minimal Surfaces Beyond the Wavy Approximation,” JHEP03 (2015) 085,arXiv:1501.04202 [hep-th]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2015

  2. [2]

    Confinement of Quarks,

    K. G. Wilson, “Confinement of Quarks,” Phys. Rev. D10(1974) 2445–2459

    work page 1974

  3. [3]

    The Reconstruction of Gauge Potentials From Wilson Loops,

    R. Giles, “The Reconstruction of Gauge Potentials From Wilson Loops,” Phys. Rev. D24 (1981) 2160

    work page 1981

  4. [4]

    Supersymmetric Yang-Mills Theories,

    L. Brink, J. H. Schwarz, and J. Scherk, “Supersymmetric Yang-Mills Theories,” Nucl. Phys. B121(1977) 77–92

    work page 1977

  5. [5]

    Supersymmetric gauge theories and the AdS / CFT correspondence,

    E. D’Hoker and D. Z. Freedman, “Supersymmetric gauge theories and the AdS / CFT correspondence,” in Theoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics (TASI 2001): Strings, Branes and EXTRA Dimensions, pp. 3–158. 1, 2002. arXiv:hep-th/0201253

    arXiv 2001

  6. [6]

    The Bethe ansatz for N=4 superYang-Mills,

    J. A. Minahan and K. Zarembo, “The Bethe ansatz for N=4 superYang-Mills,” JHEP03 (2003) 013,arXiv:hep-th/0212208

    arXiv 2003

  7. [7]

    The N=4 SYM integrable super spin chain,

    N. Beisert and M. Staudacher, “The N=4 SYM integrable super spin chain,” Nucl. Phys. B 670(2003) 439–463,arXiv:hep-th/0307042

    arXiv 2003

  8. [8]

    The Dilatation operator of conformal N=4 superYang-Mills theory,

    N. Beisert, C. Kristjansen, and M. Staudacher, “The Dilatation operator of conformal N=4 superYang-Mills theory,” Nucl. Phys. B664(2003) 131–184,arXiv:hep-th/0303060

    arXiv 2003

Show all 51 references
  1. [9]

    Review of AdS/CFT Integrability: An Overview,

    N. Beisert et al., “Review of AdS/CFT Integrability: An Overview,” Lett. Math. Phys.99 (2012) 3–32,arXiv:1012.3982 [hep-th]

    2012 arXiv

  2. [10]

    The LargeNlimit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,

    J. M. Maldacena, “The LargeNlimit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2(1998) 231–252,arXiv:hep-th/9711200

    1998 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Wilson loops in large N field theories,

    J. M. Maldacena, “Wilson loops in large N field theories,” Phys. Rev. Lett.80(1998) 4859–4862,arXiv:hep-th/9803002. – 28 –

    1998 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Macroscopic strings as heavy quarks in large N gauge theory and anti-de Sitter supergravity,

    S.-J. Rey and J.-T. Yee, “Macroscopic strings as heavy quarks in large N gauge theory and anti-de Sitter supergravity,” Eur. Phys. J. C22(2001) 379–394,arXiv:hep-th/9803001

    2001 arXiv

  5. [13]

    The Operator product expansion for Wilson loops and surfaces in the large N limit,

    D. E. Berenstein, R. Corrado, W. Fischler, and J. M. Maldacena, “The Operator product expansion for Wilson loops and surfaces in the large N limit,” Phys. Rev. D59(1999) 105023,arXiv:hep-th/9809188

    1999 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Wilson loops in N=4 supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory,

    J. K. Erickson, G. W. Semenoff, and K. Zarembo, “Wilson loops in N=4 supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory,” Nucl. Phys. B582(2000) 155–175,arXiv:hep-th/0003055

    2000 arXiv

  7. [15]

    An Exact prediction of N=4 SUSYM theory for string theory,

    N. Drukker and D. J. Gross, “An Exact prediction of N=4 SUSYM theory for string theory,” J. Math. Phys.42(2001) 2896–2914,arXiv:hep-th/0010274

    2001 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Localization of gauge theory on a four-sphere and supersymmetric Wilson loops,

    V. Pestun, “Localization of gauge theory on a four-sphere and supersymmetric Wilson loops,” Commun. Math. Phys.313(2012) 71–129,arXiv:0712.2824 [hep-th]

    2012 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Wilson loops and minimal surfaces,

    N. Drukker, D. J. Gross, and H. Ooguri, “Wilson loops and minimal surfaces,” Phys. Rev. D 60(1999) 125006,arXiv:hep-th/9904191

    1999 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Wavy Wilson line and AdS / CFT,

    G. W. Semenoff and D. Young, “Wavy Wilson line and AdS / CFT,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 20(2005) 2833–2846,arXiv:hep-th/0405288

    2005 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Supersymmetric Wilson loops,

    K. Zarembo, “Supersymmetric Wilson loops,” Nucl. Phys. B643(2002) 157–171, arXiv:hep-th/0205160

    2002 arXiv

  12. [20]

    On the integrability of Wilson loops in AdS(5) x S**5: Some periodic ansatze,

    N. Drukker and B. Fiol, “On the integrability of Wilson loops in AdS(5) x S**5: Some periodic ansatze,” JHEP01(2006) 056,arXiv:hep-th/0506058

    2006 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Supersymmetric Wilson loops on S**3,

    N. Drukker, S. Giombi, R. Ricci, and D. Trancanelli, “Supersymmetric Wilson loops on S**3,” JHEP05(2008) 017,arXiv:0711.3226 [hep-th]

    2008 arXiv

  14. [22]

    More supersymmetric Wilson loops,

    N. Drukker, S. Giombi, R. Ricci, and D. Trancanelli, “More supersymmetric Wilson loops,” Phys. Rev. D76(2007) 107703,arXiv:0704.2237 [hep-th]

    2007 arXiv

  15. [23]

    A Note on twist two operators in N=4 SYM and Wilson loops in Minkowski signature,

    M. Kruczenski, “A Note on twist two operators in N=4 SYM and Wilson loops in Minkowski signature,” JHEP12(2002) 024,arXiv:hep-th/0210115

    2002 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Gluon scattering amplitudes at strong coupling,

    L. F. Alday and J. M. Maldacena, “Gluon scattering amplitudes at strong coupling,” JHEP 06(2007) 064,arXiv:0705.0303 [hep-th]

    2007 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Comments on gluon scattering amplitudes via AdS/CFT,

    L. F. Alday and J. Maldacena, “Comments on gluon scattering amplitudes via AdS/CFT,” JHEP11(2007) 068,arXiv:0710.1060 [hep-th]

    2007 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Null polygonal Wilson loops and minimal surfaces in Anti-de-Sitter space,

    L. F. Alday and J. Maldacena, “Null polygonal Wilson loops and minimal surfaces in Anti-de-Sitter space,” JHEP11(2009) 082,arXiv:0904.0663 [hep-th]

    2009 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Integrable Hamiltonian Systems and Interactions Through Quadratic Constraints,

    K. Pohlmeyer, “Integrable Hamiltonian Systems and Interactions Through Quadratic Constraints,” Commun. Math. Phys.46(1976) 207–221

    1976

  20. [28]

    Notes on Euclidean Wilson loops and Riemann Theta functions,

    R. Ishizeki, M. Kruczenski, and S. Ziama, “Notes on Euclidean Wilson loops and Riemann Theta functions,” Phys. Rev. D85(2012) 106004,arXiv:1104.3567 [hep-th]

    2012 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Wilson loops and Riemann theta functions II,

    M. Kruczenski and S. Ziama, “Wilson loops and Riemann theta functions II,” JHEP05 (2014) 037,arXiv:1311.4950 [hep-th]

    2014 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Wilson loops and minimal area surfaces in hyperbolic space,

    M. Kruczenski, “Wilson loops and minimal area surfaces in hyperbolic space,” JHEP11 (2014) 065,arXiv:1406.4945 [hep-th]

    2014 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Deformations of the – 29 – circular Wilson loop and spectral (in)dependence,

    M. Cooke, A. Dekel, N. Drukker, D. Trancanelli, and E. Vescovi, “Deformations of the – 29 – circular Wilson loop and spectral (in)dependence,” JHEP01(2019) 076,arXiv:1811.09638 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Master Symmetry for Holographic Wilson Loops,

    T. Klose, F. Loebbert, and H. Munkler, “Master Symmetry for Holographic Wilson Loops,” Phys. Rev. D94no. 6, (2016) 066006,arXiv:1606.04104 [hep-th]

    2016 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Nonlocal Symmetries, Spectral Parameter and Minimal Surfaces in AdS/CFT,

    T. Klose, F. Loebbert, and H. M¨ unkler, “Nonlocal Symmetries, Spectral Parameter and Minimal Surfaces in AdS/CFT,” Nucl. Phys. B916(2017) 320–372,arXiv:1610.01161 [hep-th]

    2017 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Minimal area surfaces inAdS 3 through integrability,

    Y. He and M. Kruczenski, “Minimal area surfaces inAdS 3 through integrability,” J. Phys. A 50no. 49, (2017) 495401,arXiv:1705.10037 [hep-th]

    2017 arXiv

  27. [35]

    On shape dependence of holographic mutual information in AdS 4,

    P. Fonda, L. Giomi, A. Salvio, and E. Tonni, “On shape dependence of holographic mutual information in AdS 4,” JHEP02(2015) 005,arXiv:1411.3608 [hep-th]

    2015 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Fermionic Bogomolnyi-Prasad-Sommerfield Wilson loops in four-dimensionalN= 2 superconformal gauge theories,

    H. Ouyang and J.-B. Wu, “Fermionic Bogomolnyi-Prasad-Sommerfield Wilson loops in four-dimensionalN= 2 superconformal gauge theories,” SciPost Phys.14no. 1, (2023) 008, arXiv:2205.01348 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  29. [37]

    More fermionic supersymmetric Wilson loops in four dimensions,

    H. Ouyang and J.-B. Wu, “More fermionic supersymmetric Wilson loops in four dimensions,” Phys. Lett. B853(2024) 138649,arXiv:2309.12021 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Two loop ghost free quantisation of Wilson loops in N=4 supersymmetric Yang-Mills,

    H. Malcha, “Two loop ghost free quantisation of Wilson loops in N=4 supersymmetric Yang-Mills,” Phys. Lett. B833(2022) 137377,arXiv:2206.02919 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Renormalized area and properly embedded minimal surfaces in hyperbolic 3-manifolds,

    S. Alexakis and R. Mazzeo, “Renormalized area and properly embedded minimal surfaces in hyperbolic 3-manifolds,” Commun. Math. Phys.297(2010) 621–651

    2010

  32. [40]

    Wilson Loop Renormalization Group Flows,

    J. Polchinski and J. Sully, “Wilson Loop Renormalization Group Flows,” JHEP10(2011) 059,arXiv:1104.5077 [hep-th]

    2011 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Non-supersymmetric Wilson loop inN= 4 SYM and defect 1d CFT,

    M. Beccaria, S. Giombi, and A. Tseytlin, “Non-supersymmetric Wilson loop inN= 4 SYM and defect 1d CFT,” JHEP03(2018) 131,arXiv:1712.06874 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  34. [42]

    On non-supersymmetric generalizations of the Wilson-Maldacena loops inN= 4 SYM,

    M. Beccaria and A. A. Tseytlin, “On non-supersymmetric generalizations of the Wilson-Maldacena loops inN= 4 SYM,” Nucl. Phys. B934(2018) 466–497, arXiv:1804.02179 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Geometric flow description of minimal surfaces,

    D. Katsinis, I. Mitsoulas, and G. Pastras, “Geometric flow description of minimal surfaces,” Phys. Rev. D101no. 8, (2020) 086015,arXiv:1910.06680 [hep-th]

    2020 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Green-Schwarz string in AdS(5) x S**5: Semiclassical partition function,

    N. Drukker, D. J. Gross, and A. A. Tseytlin, “Green-Schwarz string in AdS(5) x S**5: Semiclassical partition function,” JHEP04(2000) 021,arXiv:hep-th/0001204

    2000 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Matching the circular Wilson loop with dual open string solution at 1-loop in strong coupling,

    M. Kruczenski and A. Tirziu, “Matching the circular Wilson loop with dual open string solution at 1-loop in strong coupling,” JHEP05(2008) 064,arXiv:0803.0315 [hep-th]

    2008 arXiv

  38. [46]

    More about One-Loop Effective Action of Open Superstring inAdS 5 ×S 5,

    C. Kristjansen and Y. Makeenko, “More about One-Loop Effective Action of Open Superstring inAdS 5 ×S 5,” JHEP09(2012) 053,arXiv:1206.5660 [hep-th]

    2012 arXiv

  39. [47]

    1/N correction in the D3-brane description of a circular Wilson loop at strong coupling,

    E. I. Buchbinder and A. A. Tseytlin, “1/N correction in the D3-brane description of a circular Wilson loop at strong coupling,” Phys. Rev. D89no. 12, (2014) 126008, arXiv:1404.4952 [hep-th]

    2014 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Precision matching of circular Wilson loops and strings in AdS 5 ×S 5,

    D. Medina-Rincon, A. A. Tseytlin, and K. Zarembo, “Precision matching of circular Wilson loops and strings in AdS 5 ×S 5,” JHEP05(2018) 199,arXiv:1804.08925 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Aspects of Holographic Entanglement Entropy,

    S. Ryu and T. Takayanagi, “Aspects of Holographic Entanglement Entropy,” JHEP08 (2006) 045,arXiv:hep-th/0605073. – 30 –

    2006 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Holographic derivation of entanglement entropy from AdS/CFT,

    S. Ryu and T. Takayanagi, “Holographic derivation of entanglement entropy from AdS/CFT,” Phys. Rev. Lett.96(2006) 181602,arXiv:hep-th/0603001

    2006 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Di Francesco, P

    P. Di Francesco, P. Mathieu, and D. Senechal, Conformal Field Theory. Graduate Texts in Contemporary Physics. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1997. – 31 –

    1997

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.