Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

This paper derives leading and subleading soft-graviton factors from the effective field theory of D0-brane bound states in BFSS matrix theory, matching the soft theorem predicted for that theory.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-04 09:23 UTC pith:K7BGSO4Y

load-bearing objection A technically interesting re-derivation of the BFSS soft theorem; the subleading factor has an unverified N-suppression claim a referee should chase. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2510.15488 v4 pith:K7BGSO4Y submitted 2025-10-17 hep-th

A Soft Theorem from vertex-like operators in BFSS Theory

Davide Laurenzano , John F. Wheater This is my paper
classification hep-th
keywords soft theoremBFSS matrix theoryD0-brane bound statesM-theorygraviton vertex operatorssupergravityasymptotic symmetrieseffective field theory
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper tries to establish that, within the effective large-distance theory describing interactions between D0-brane bound states in BFSS matrix theory, there exist vertex-like operators with the quantum numbers of eleven-dimensional gravitons, and that their scattering amplitudes factorise when one graviton is soft. The leading and subleading soft factors are computed explicitly and take exactly the form predicted for BFSS theory. If correct, this supports the conjecture that BFSS matrix theory reproduces 11-dimensional supergravity and its infinite-dimensional asymptotic symmetries. The proof is carried out inside a truncated effective theory with pairwise interactions, so the result is conditional on that truncation.

Core claim

The central claim is that soft graviton emission in BFSS theory factorises at leading and subleading order: correlation functions of vertex-like operators—composites of velocity fields with symmetric traceless SO(9) polarisation tensors—obey A(soft + hard) = (S^(-1) + S^(0) + ...) A(hard). The leading factor is S^(-1) = -2 sqrt(32πG_N) h^{IJ} Σ_j η_s η_j (N_j/N_s) v^I_{sj} v^J_{sj} / v^2_{sj}, and the subleading factor S^(0) receives orbital and spin contributions, matching the soft theorem previously predicted for BFSS. The derivation uses the 1/r^7 and 1/r^8 terms of the two-body effective Lagrangian, an auxiliary-field rewriting with a UV cutoff, and a resummation of interaction chains. T

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the vertex-like operator V_j, built from two velocity fields and an exponential phase, with a cosine insertion that reabsorbs the divergence of the graviton two-point function and fixes the normalisation to the correct graviton overlap. The interaction is rewritten with an auxiliary scalar σ regulated by a small parameter ϵ; the computation reduces to Wick contractions of chains of σ insertions, resummed into a functional F[σ] whose expectation values control the large-N counting. The soft expansion is organised in powers of λ ~ 1/N^2, with the leading soft factor arising from the 1/r^7 four-velocity interaction and the subleading factor from the 1/r^8 orbital and

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the pairwise, one-loop, large-distance effective Lagrangian with three-body interactions discarded captures the soft behaviour of the full BFSS theory; if three-body or higher-loop effects contribute at O(N) or O(1) in the soft expansion, the claimed factorisation fails.

What would settle it

Compute the contribution of the three-body interaction terms to a five-point soft amplitude in the effective theory and check whether any term scales as N or N^0 in the soft limit; if such a term survives, the factorisation fails. Alternatively, evaluate the O(X^6/r^14) insertion into the soft amplitude and see whether it contributes at order N^0, which would make the subleading factor (5.23) incomplete.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • If the result holds, BFSS scattering amplitudes exhibit soft factorisation at O(N) and O(1), matching the universal soft graviton theorem.
  • The explicit subleading factor includes orbital and spin pieces, so the soft theorem encodes angular-momentum conservation within the matrix-theory effective description.
  • The UV finiteness of the one-dimensional effective theory supports the use of a simple regulator and suggests that no counterterms are needed at this order.
  • The vertex-like operator construction provides a concrete way to represent graviton states in the target space of matrix theory.
  • Within the regime of validity of the effective theory, the result is evidence for the realisation of the full 11-dimensional Lorentz symmetry and an infinite-dimensional asymptotic symmetry group.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper leaves open whether the soft theorem survives beyond the pairwise effective theory: three-body forces or higher-loop effects could contribute at O(N) or O(1) in the soft expansion, so the honest reading is that the theorem is proven for the truncated theory.
  • A testable extension is to include the O(X^6/r^14) term, which the paper notes is the only higher-order term that could mix with the subleading soft factor; computing its insertion would check whether (5.23) is complete.
  • The cosine-regulated vertex operator construction may generalise to gravitinos and three-form fields, potentially giving soft theorems for the full supergravity multiplet in BFSS.
  • If the EFT proof can be lifted to the full matrix model, the soft theorem would tie emergent spacetime symmetries in M-theory to infinitely many conserved charges.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the one-dimensional effective field theory (2.5) obtained from BFSS by integrating out massive fluctuations around separated D0-brane bound states. It introduces vertex-like operators (3.19) with a cosine regulator and an auxiliary field sigma(t) to compute correlation functions. The authors show that the leading interaction term of the EFT produces the leading soft factor S^(-1) in (4.30), and that the O(1/r^8) terms L_ang and L_spin produce the subleading soft factor S^(0) in (5.23), matching the BFSS soft theorem predicted in [14]. Appendix A argues that the sigma-regulated theory is UV finite. The paper explicitly works in the truncated pairwise EFT, and the final remark of Section 5 notes a potentially dangerous higher-order term that is not analyzed.

Significance. If the result holds, the paper provides an explicit worldline derivation of the leading and subleading soft graviton factorization in the BFSS effective theory, using composite vertex-like operators with target-space graviton quantum numbers. The leading-order computation is detailed and the chain resummation is clearly presented. The UV-finiteness argument in Appendix A is a useful technical contribution. I also credit the authors for being transparent about the main limitations: three-body interactions are dropped and the subleading soft factor is derived from a truncated EFT. However, the subleading derivation is compressed, and the paper itself identifies a term, O(Xdot^6/r^14), that could mix with the subleading order but whose suppression is only asserted. Because S^(0) is a central claim, this gap must be closed or the claim appropriately weakened before the paper can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 5, final remark (p. 27)] The final remark states that the O(Xdot^6/r^14) term is 'the only term which would mix up with the subleading order of the soft expansion' and asserts that it is suppressed by O(1/N) 'after considering their contractions with external vertex operators'. No computation is shown. Since Eq. (5.23) is derived solely from L_ang and L_spin at O(1/r^8), a contribution at O(N^0) from this term would correct the subleading soft factor. This is a load-bearing gap in the proof of S^(0). Please provide the power-counting or contraction analysis that demonstrates the suppression, or explicitly include the term. The same concern applies to three-body interactions dropped in Eq. (2.5): the paper only says they appear at higher orders, but does not give their N-scaling in the soft limit.
  2. [Section 5.1-5.2, Eqs. (5.12), (5.13), (5.22)] The subleading soft factor is the central new result, yet the derivation is compressed with the statement that the bulk is 'analogous' to the leading computation. In particular, the orbital derivative term (5.12), the extraction of X_j(t_j) via (5.11), the second term in (5.13), and the spin operator normalization S^IJ_j in (5.16) are not shown in enough detail to verify the final formula. The repeated identical lines in (5.13) also make the presentation confusing. For a proof of the subleading theorem, the contraction scheme for the L_ang and L_spin insertions should be given explicitly, or the derivation should be moved to an appendix.
  3. [Section 3.2, Eqs. (3.26)-(3.30) and (4.28)] The normalization of the vertex-like operators is not fully fixed by BFSS dynamics. The constant c_k in (3.30) is chosen so that the two-point function equals h·h, and N_s is set to -i sqrt(32 pi G_N) after (4.28) to match the target-space gravitational coupling. Thus the overall coefficient of the soft factor is fitted to supergravity rather than predicted from the matrix model. This is a legitimate matching procedure, but the paper should state clearly that the theorem establishes the form and N-scaling of the soft factor, with the coefficient fixed by matching, rather than suggesting the coefficient is derived from first principles.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.1, Eq. (3.18)] The sigma propagator (3.18) involves a time-dependent lambda(t), but the momentum-space power counting in Appendix A treats lambda as constant. The appendix should clarify the validity of this approximation or the formal justification for freezing lambda in the UV analysis.
  2. [Section 5.1, Eq. (5.8)] The displayed integrand in A^(3)_sub contains what appears to be a typo: the under-braced expression mixes ˙X^I_s(ts) with ˙X^J_j(ts), while the surrounding text indicates both soft operators should be ˙X_s(ts). Please correct the notation.
  3. [Section 4, Eq. (4.24)] The proof that non-adjacent F[sigma] contractions are suppressed by O(epsilon) is sketched only to all orders in words. Since this resummation is important for the leading result, a short combinatorial derivation or a reference to a standard argument would improve readability.
  4. [Section 5.2, Eq. (5.15)] The spin coupling (5.15) is taken from [36] with a factor -R/N_j. It would be helpful to state whether this is exactly the form used in [36] after canonical normalization, and to specify the conventions for the spin generator S^IJ_j used in the final result.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Overall soft-factor coupling is matched, not derived; the factorization structure is computed.

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 4, after eq. (4.28), eqs. (4.29)-(4.30)]
    "We have freedom in choosing the normalisation constant of the soft vertex operator to match the target space gravitational coupling, which amounts to fixing N_s = −i√(32πG_N), and we obtain ... which is the statement of the leading soft theorem, as anticipated."

    The overall coupling in the leading soft factor is not produced by the BFSS dynamics; it is imposed by fixing the arbitrary normalization N_s. Since eq. (2.9) had already been written as the result of [14] in Section 2, eq. (4.29) reproduces the target coefficient by construction. The subleading factor (5.23) inherits the same N_s, so the common coupling √(32πG_N) is an input for both soft factors. The factorization identity and the relative kinematic structure of S^(0) are nevertheless computed from the EFT, so the circularity is partial rather than total.

full rationale

The derivation is mostly a direct EFT computation. Starting from the independent pairwise one-loop effective Lagrangian (2.4)-(2.5) and the currents L_ang and L_spin taken from [36], the paper computes soft-emission diagrams and obtains the factorized form A = (S^(-1)+S^(0)+...)A. The kinematic structure of S^(-1) (v_sj^I v_sj^J/v_sj^2) and the composition of S^(0) (orbital and spin terms with relative coefficients) are derived, not assumed. The one clear reduction is the normalization of the soft vertex operator: the text fixes N_s = -i√(32πG_N) "to match the target space gravitational coupling," and the conclusion states the match with [14] is "up to a matching of the overall constant." Thus the overall coupling is fitted, and the leading soft factor (4.29) equals the earlier-quoted [14] expression (2.9) by construction once that choice is made. This is a fitted input, but it does not consume the whole derivation: the relative subleading structure and the factorization identity remain independent content. No load-bearing self-citation is present: [14], [36], [54,55] are by other authors and enter as benchmarks or previously derived EFT terms. The final remark of Section 5 admits that the O(\dot X^6/r^14) EFT term could mix with the subleading order and asserts an O(1/N) suppression without showing the computation; this is a completeness/correctness gap, not circularity. Accordingly, score 4.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 5 axioms · 2 invented entities

The paper leans on the BFSS conjecture and the known one-loop EFT as inputs. Its new construction—vertex operators with a cosine regulator—is tuned by β_k and c_k to cancel divergences and normalize the graviton overlap, and the soft-graviton coupling is fixed by hand via N_s. These fitted parameters, rather than a parameter-free derivation, set the final soft-theorem coefficients.

free parameters (3)
  • c_k (vertex-operator normalization) = 1/|N_k|^2
    Chosen in eq. (3.30) so the graviton two-point function equals h^{IJ} \tilde{h}_{IJ}; fixes the vertex-operator normalization rather than deriving it.
  • N_s (soft vertex-operator normalization) = -i sqrt(32πG_N)
    Set by hand after eq. (4.28) to match the target-space gravitational coupling; not obtained from BFSS dynamics or the EFT coefficient A.
  • β_k (cosine regulator parameter) = sqrt(R/(v_k^2 N_k)) sqrt(ε(π/2 + c_k ε))
    Chosen in eq. (3.26) to cancel the 1/ε divergence in the graviton two-point function; a regularization-dependent construction of the vertex operator.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption BFSS/M-theory DLCQ duality
    The whole setup assumes the BFSS conjecture, interpreting D0-brane bound states as supergravitons in M-theory (§1).
  • domain assumption Large-distance one-loop effective Lagrangian (2.4)/(2.5)
    The paper starts from the effective action obtained by integrating out heavy fluctuations at one loop in the large-distance limit; the validity of this truncation is taken from prior literature.
  • domain assumption Pairwise truncation / no three-body interactions
    Stated in §2: 'In this approximation, we have ignored three-body interactions, which will appear at higher orders in the effective field theory.' The soft theorem is proven only within this approximation.
  • ad hoc to paper Vertex operator form (3.19) with cosine factor
    The form of the vertex-like operators, including the cosine and β_k, is imposed to cancel divergences and match the graviton overlap; it is not derived from BFSS first principles.
  • domain assumption Soft theorem implies asymptotic symmetries / full Lorentz group
    The conclusion interprets the soft theorem via the equivalence with asymptotic symmetries established in [14,15]; this connection is not re-derived here.
invented entities (2)
  • Auxiliary field σ(t) no independent evidence
    purpose: Linearize the quartic interaction and implement a UV cutoff through the ε-regulated kinetic term (3.9)
    A computational device introduced in §3.1; it has no independent physical evidence.
  • Cosine factor in vertex operators no independent evidence
    purpose: Cancel δ(0)/1/ε divergences in the graviton two-point function
    Ad hoc regularization-dependent addition to the vertex operator, with β_k chosen by hand; its cross-contractions are argued to vanish but no external handle is provided.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 25654 in / 16358 out tokens · 141434 ms · 2026-08-04T09:23:16.960503+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

In this paper, we derive a soft theorem at leading and subleading orders within the context of BFSS matrix theory. Specifically, we consider the effective field theory describing interactions between bound states of D0-branes at leading order, which are dual to supergraviton interactions in the eleven-dimensional target space. This theory is obtained from BFSS theory by integrating out heavy degrees of freedom in the large-distance limit at one loop. As part of our analysis, we demonstrate that when treated as a one-dimensional quantum field theory with a UV cutoff, the theory is super-renormalizable and all Feynman diagrams converge. Our main result shows that the theory admits vertex-like operators with the correct quantum numbers to represent supergravitons in target space and that their correlation functions exhibit soft factorisation at both leading and subleading orders.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Fuzzy Black Holes from Mass Generation in Matrix Compactification

    hep-th 2025-11 conditional novelty 6.0

    Compactifying BFSS on T^3 with mixed fermion boundary conditions yields a mass-deformed theory whose fuzzy-sphere plus fermion configurations are proposed as Schwarzschild black holes with entropy S∼N.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 50 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Strominger,Asymptotic Symmetries of Yang-Mills Theory,JHEP07(2014) 151 [1308.0589]

    A. Strominger,Asymptotic Symmetries of Yang-Mills Theory,JHEP07(2014) 151 [1308.0589]. – 29 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  2. [2]

    T. He, P. Mitra and A. Strominger,2D Kac-Moody Symmetry of 4D Yang-Mills Theory, JHEP10(2016) 137 [1503.02663]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  3. [3]

    Kapec, V

    D. Kapec, V. Lysov, S. Pasterski and A. Strominger,Higher-dimensional supertranslations and Weinberg’s soft graviton theorem,Ann. Math. Sci. Appl.02(2017) 69 [1502.07644]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  4. [4]

    Kapec and P

    D. Kapec and P. Mitra,Shadows and soft exchange in celestial CFT,Phys. Rev. D105 (2022) 026009 [2109.00073]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  5. [5]

    T. He, P. Mitra, A.P. Porfyriadis and A. Strominger,New Symmetries of Massless QED, JHEP10(2014) 112 [1407.3789]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  6. [6]

    T. He, V. Lysov, P. Mitra and A. Strominger,BMS supertranslations and Weinberg’s soft graviton theorem,JHEP05(2015) 151 [1401.7026]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  7. [7]

    Kapec, V

    D. Kapec, V. Lysov, S. Pasterski and A. Strominger,Semiclassical Virasoro symmetry of the quantum gravityS-matrix,JHEP08(2014) 058 [1406.3312]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  8. [8]

    Campiglia and A

    M. Campiglia and A. Laddha,Asymptotic symmetries and subleading soft graviton theorem, Phys. Rev. D90(2014) 124028 [1408.2228]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  9. [9]

    Cachazo and A

    F. Cachazo and A. Strominger,Evidence for a New Soft Graviton Theorem,1404.4091

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  10. [10]

    Campiglia and A

    M. Campiglia and A. Laddha,Asymptotic symmetries of QED and Weinberg’s soft photon theorem,JHEP07(2015) 115 [1505.05346]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  11. [11]

    Colferai and S

    D. Colferai and S. Lionetti,Asymptotic symmetries and the subleading soft graviton theorem in higher dimensions,Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 064010 [2005.03439]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  12. [12]

    Agrawal and K

    S. Agrawal and K. Nguyen,Soft theorems and spontaneous symmetry breaking,Phys. Rev. D 112(2025) L021903 [2504.10577]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  13. [13]

    Weinberg,Infrared photons and gravitons,Phys

    S. Weinberg,Infrared photons and gravitons,Phys. Rev.140(1965) B516

    1965

  14. [14]

    Tropper and T

    A. Tropper and T. Wang,Lorentz symmetry and IR structure of the BFSS matrix model, JHEP07(2023) 150 [2303.14200]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  15. [15]

    Miller, A

    N. Miller, A. Strominger, A. Tropper and T. Wang,Soft gravitons in the BFSS matrix model, JHEP11(2023) 174 [2208.14547]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  16. [16]

    Banks, W

    T. Banks, W. Fischler, S.H. Shenker and L. Susskind,M theory as a matrix model: A conjecture,Phys. Rev. D55(1997) 5112 [hep-th/9610043]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  17. [17]

    Susskind,Another conjecture about M(atrix) theory,hep-th/9704080

    L. Susskind,Another conjecture about M(atrix) theory,hep-th/9704080

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  18. [18]

    Taylor,M(atrix) Theory: Matrix Quantum Mechanics as a Fundamental Theory,Rev

    W. Taylor,M(atrix) Theory: Matrix Quantum Mechanics as a Fundamental Theory,Rev. Mod. Phys.73(2001) 419 [hep-th/0101126]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  19. [19]

    Polchinski,M theory and the light cone,Prog

    J. Polchinski,M theory and the light cone,Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl.134(1999) 158 [hep-th/9903165]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  20. [20]

    Ydri,Review of M(atrix)-Theory, Type IIB Matrix Model and Matrix String Theory, 1708.00734

    B. Ydri,Review of M(atrix)-Theory, Type IIB Matrix Model and Matrix String Theory, 1708.00734

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  21. [21]

    Bigatti and L

    D. Bigatti and L. Susskind,Review of matrix theory,NATO Sci. Ser. C520(1999) 277 [hep-th/9712072]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  22. [22]

    Seiberg,Why is the matrix model correct?,Physical Review Letters79(1997) 3577 [hep-th/9710009]

    N. Seiberg,Why is the matrix model correct?,Physical Review Letters79(1997) 3577 [hep-th/9710009]. – 30 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  23. [23]

    Sethi and M

    S. Sethi and M. Stern,D-brane bound states redux,Commun. Math. Phys.194(1998) 675 [hep-th/9705046]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  24. [24]

    Yi,Witten index and threshold bound states of D-branes,Nucl

    P. Yi,Witten index and threshold bound states of D-branes,Nucl. Phys. B505(1997) 307 [hep-th/9704098]. [25]Monte Carlo String/M-theory (MCSMC), MCSMCcollaboration, Confinement/deconfinement transition in the D0-brane matrix model — A signature of M-theory?,JHEP05(2022) 096 [2110.01312]. [26]Monte Carlo String/M-theory (MCSMC)collaboration,Precision test o...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  25. [27]

    Danielsson, G

    U.H. Danielsson, G. Ferretti and B. Sundborg,D particle dynamics and bound states,Int. J. Mod. Phys. A11(1996) 5463 [hep-th/9603081]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  26. [28]

    Kabat and P

    D.N. Kabat and P. Pouliot,A Comment on zero-brane quantum mechanics,Phys. Rev. Lett. 77(1996) 1004 [hep-th/9603127]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  27. [29]

    Bachas,D-brane dynamics,Phys

    C. Bachas,D-brane dynamics,Phys. Lett. B374(1996) 37 [hep-th/9511043]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  28. [30]

    Moore, N

    G. Moore, N. Nekrasov and S. Shatashvili,D -particle bound states and generalized instantons,Communications in Mathematical Physics209(2000) 77

    2000

  29. [31]

    Okawa and T

    Y. Okawa and T. Yoneya,Multibody interactions of D particles in supergravity and matrix theory,Nucl. Phys. B538(1999) 67 [hep-th/9806108]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  30. [32]

    Okawa and T

    Y. Okawa and T. Yoneya,Equations of motion and Galilei invariance in D particle dynamics,Nucl. Phys. B541(1999) 163 [hep-th/9808188]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  31. [33]

    Becker and M

    K. Becker and M. Becker,A Two loop test of M(atrix) theory,Nucl. Phys. B506(1997) 48 [hep-th/9705091]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  32. [34]

    Becker, M

    K. Becker, M. Becker, J. Polchinski and A.A. Tseytlin,Higher order graviton scattering in M(atrix) theory,Phys. Rev. D56(1997) R3174 [hep-th/9706072]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  33. [35]

    Kabat and W

    D.N. Kabat and W. Taylor,Linearized supergravity from matrix theory,Phys. Lett. B426 (1998) 297 [hep-th/9712185]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  34. [36]

    Taylor and M

    W. Taylor and M. Van Raamsdonk,Supergravity currents and linearized interactions for matrix theory configurations with fermionic backgrounds,JHEP04(1999) 013 [hep-th/9812239]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  35. [37]

    Plefka and A

    J. Plefka and A. Waldron,On the quantum mechanics of M (atrix) theory,Nucl. Phys. B 512(1998) 460

    1998

  36. [38]

    Plefka, M

    J.C. Plefka, M. Serone and A.K. Waldron,The Matrix theory S matrix,Phys. Rev. Lett.81 (1998) 2866 [hep-th/9806081]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  37. [39]

    Plefka, M

    J. Plefka, M. Serone and A. Waldron,Matrix theory and Feynman diagrams,Fortsch. Phys. 48(2000) 191 [hep-th/9903099]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  38. [40]

    Plefka and A

    J. Plefka and A. Waldron,Asymptotic supergraviton states in matrix theory, in31st International Ahrenshoop Symposium on the Theory of Elementary Particles, pp. 130–136, 9, 1997 [hep-th/9801093]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  39. [41]

    Helling, J

    R. Helling, J. Plefka, M. Serone and A. Waldron,Three graviton scattering in M theory, Nucl. Phys. B559(1999) 184 [hep-th/9905183]. – 31 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  40. [42]

    Becker and M

    K. Becker and M. Becker,On graviton scattering amplitudes in M theory,Phys. Rev. D57 (1998) 6464 [hep-th/9712238]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  41. [43]

    Lin and Z

    H.W. Lin and Z. Zheng,Bootstrapping ground state correlators in matrix theory. Part I, JHEP01(2025) 190 [2410.14647]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  42. [44]

    Biggs and A

    A. Biggs and A. Herderschee,Higher-point correlators in the BFSS matrix model, 2503.14685

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  43. [45]

    McLoughlin, A

    T. McLoughlin, A. Puhm and A.-M. Raclariu,The sagex review on scattering amplitudes chapter 11: Soft theorems and celestial amplitudes,Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical55(2022) 443012

    2022

  44. [46]

    Donnay,Celestial holography: An asymptotic symmetry perspective,Phys

    L. Donnay,Celestial holography: An asymptotic symmetry perspective,Phys. Rept.1073 (2024) 1 [2310.12922]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  45. [47]

    Broedel, M

    J. Broedel, M. de Leeuw, J. Plefka and M. Rosso,Constraining subleading soft gluon and graviton theorems,Phys. Rev. D90(2014) 065024 [1406.6574]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  46. [48]

    Z. Bern, S. Davies, P. Di Vecchia and J. Nohle,Low-Energy Behavior of Gluons and Gravitons from Gauge Invariance,Phys. Rev. D90(2014) 084035 [1406.6987]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  47. [49]

    Bianchi, S

    M. Bianchi, S. He, Y.-t. Huang and C. Wen,More on Soft Theorems: Trees, Loops and Strings,Phys. Rev. D92(2015) 065022 [1406.5155]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  48. [50]

    Di Vecchia, R

    P. Di Vecchia, R. Marotta and M. Mojaza,Double-soft behavior for scalars and gluons from string theory,JHEP12(2015) 150 [1507.00938]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  49. [51]

    Sen,Soft Theorems in Superstring Theory,JHEP06(2017) 113 [1702.03934]

    A. Sen,Soft Theorems in Superstring Theory,JHEP06(2017) 113 [1702.03934]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  50. [52]

    Higuchi and H

    S. Higuchi and H. Kawai,Universality of soft theorem from locality of soft vertex operators, Nucl. Phys. B936(2018) 400 [1805.11079]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  51. [53]

    Strominger,Lectures on the Infrared Structure of Gravity and Gauge Theory,1703.05448

    A. Strominger,Lectures on the Infrared Structure of Gravity and Gauge Theory,1703.05448

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  52. [54]

    Herderschee and J

    A. Herderschee and J. Maldacena,Three point amplitudes in matrix theory,J. Phys. A57 (2024) 165401 [2312.12592]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  53. [55]

    Herderschee and J

    A. Herderschee and J. Maldacena,Soft theorems in matrix theory,JHEP11(2024) 052 [2312.15111]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  54. [56]

    Sethi and M

    S. Sethi and M. Stern,Supersymmetry and the Yang-Mills effective action at finite N,JHEP 06(1999) 004 [hep-th/9903049]. – 32 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999