arxiv: 2604.15422 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-16 · ✦ hep-th

Recognition: unknown

Semiclassics at the cusp

Jahmall Bersini , Domenico Orlando , Susanne Reffert , Jesse Woods

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 09:50 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-th

keywords cusp anomalous dimensionAbelian Higgs modelcusped Wilson linessemiclassical expansiondouble-scaling limitdefect CFTanomalous dimensionsgauge theory

0 comments

The pith

A semiclassical double-scaling limit computes the cusp anomalous dimension for arbitrary charges up to NNLO in the Abelian Higgs model.

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

The paper develops a semiclassical framework for cusped Wilson line operators in the Abelian Higgs model in four minus epsilon dimensions at large external charges. By taking the double-scaling limit where the charge Q goes to infinity and epsilon to zero while keeping Q epsilon fixed, the authors obtain analytic expressions for the cusp anomalous dimension. This resums all orders of scalar self-interactions while expanding the gauge coupling to next-to-next-to-leading order. The resulting expressions connect the perturbative regime to the large-charge regime and supply new predictions for defect CFT observables such as the Mandelstam-Schwinger-dressed two-point function.

Core claim

We study cusped Wilson line operators in the Abelian Higgs model in d = 4 - epsilon at large external charges. Using a double-scaling limit Q to infinity, epsilon to zero with Q epsilon fixed, we develop a semiclassical framework that provides analytic control beyond fixed-order perturbation theory. We compute the cusp anomalous dimension for arbitrary charges up to next-to-next-to-leading order in the gauge coupling, while resumming scalar self-interactions to all orders. Our results interpolate between perturbative and large-charge regimes, accessing domains that are invisible in fixed-order perturbation theory. As an application, we provide new predictions for various defect CFTObservable

What carries the argument

The double-scaling limit Q to infinity, epsilon to zero with Q epsilon fixed, which enables a semiclassical expansion for cusped Wilson lines that resums scalar self-interactions to all orders while expanding the gauge coupling to NNLO.

If this is right

The cusp anomalous dimension is now available for any finite charge value instead of only the small-charge or large-charge extremes.
Analytic predictions exist for the Mandelstam-Schwinger-dressed two-point function that characterizes the superconducting phase transition.
The same framework supplies new defect CFT data that cannot be reached by ordinary perturbative calculations.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The double-scaling technique may extend to other four-dimensional gauge theories with line defects to resum scalar or Yukawa interactions.
If the expansion remains accurate, it could serve as a benchmark for lattice simulations of the Abelian Higgs model at intermediate charges.
The all-order resummation of scalar self-interactions suggests that similar limits could isolate dominant interaction channels in related condensed-matter models.

Load-bearing premise

The double-scaling limit with Q epsilon fixed produces a valid semiclassical expansion that captures physics beyond fixed-order perturbation theory.

What would settle it

A numerical or independent analytic mismatch between the computed NNLO cusp anomalous dimension and the result obtained from a direct large-charge expansion or from a fixed-order epsilon expansion at finite charge would disprove the validity of the semiclassical framework.

read the original abstract

We study cusped Wilson line operators in the Abelian Higgs model in $ d = 4 - \epsilon $ at large external charges. Using a double-scaling limit $ Q \to \infty $, $ \epsilon \to 0 $ with $ Q\epsilon $ fixed, we develop a semiclassical framework that provides analytic control beyond fixed-order perturbation theory. We compute the cusp anomalous dimension for arbitrary charges up to next-to-next-to-leading order in the gauge coupling, while resumming scalar self-interactions to all orders. Our results interpolate between perturbative and large-charge regimes, accessing domains that are invisible in fixed-order perturbation theory. As an application, we provide new predictions for various defect CFT observables, including the Mandelstam-Schwinger-dressed two-point function characterizing the superconducting phase transition.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper sets up a double-scaling semiclassical treatment of cusped Wilson lines in the Abelian Higgs model that resums scalar interactions to all orders and reaches NNLO in the gauge coupling, but the uniformity of that expansion for arbitrary charges is the part that needs checking.

read the letter

The main takeaway is that they combine a double-scaling limit (Q to infinity, epsilon to zero with Q epsilon held fixed) with a semiclassical saddle for cusped operators. This lets them compute the cusp anomalous dimension at arbitrary charges while treating gauge corrections only to next-to-next-to-leading order and resumming the scalar self-interactions completely. The result is meant to interpolate between ordinary perturbation theory and the strict large-charge regime, and they apply it to a few defect CFT quantities including the Mandelstam-Schwinger dressed two-point function near the superconducting transition. That interpolation is the concrete advance over earlier fixed-order or pure large-charge calculations. The application to phase-transition observables is a clear plus; it turns the formal setup into something that could be compared with other methods or numerics. The soft spot is the control of the expansion itself. The double-scaling limit has to keep higher-order corrections and mixed gauge-scalar contributions parametrically small even when Q epsilon is order one and when the charge is continued away from the strict large-Q regime. If subleading saddles or zero-mode factors enter at the same order as the NNLO terms, the claimed accuracy would be affected. The abstract states the results but the full text needs to show the explicit saddle-point equations and any checks against known limits to confirm the expansion is uniform. If those steps are done carefully, the concern is minor; if they are only sketched, it becomes the central thing a referee would ask about. This is for people already working on large-charge expansions, defect operators, or analytic methods in gauge theories with scalars. A reader who wants new interpolation formulas between regimes would get direct value. I would send it to peer review because the setup is specific enough that referees can test the expansion details and decide whether the interpolation holds.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a semiclassical framework for cusped Wilson line operators in the Abelian Higgs model in d=4-ε at large external charges. Using the double-scaling limit Q→∞, ε→0 with Qε fixed, it computes the cusp anomalous dimension for arbitrary charges up to NNLO in the gauge coupling while resumming scalar self-interactions to all orders. The results are claimed to interpolate between perturbative and large-charge regimes and are applied to new predictions for defect CFT observables, including the Mandelstam-Schwinger-dressed two-point function in the superconducting phase.

Significance. If the claimed control over the semiclassical expansion holds, the work would provide a useful analytic bridge between fixed-order perturbation theory and the large-charge regime in defect CFTs, yielding concrete predictions for observables that are inaccessible at fixed order.

major comments (2)

[Abstract and introduction] The central claim that the double-scaling limit produces a controlled semiclassical expansion for arbitrary charges (not necessarily large) requires explicit demonstration that higher-order 1/Q corrections remain parametrically small when Qε is O(1). The abstract states the computation and resummation but provides no derivation details, error estimates, or checks against known limits.
[Semiclassical framework] It is not shown that the effective potential or saddle-point equations admit a consistent 1/Q expansion in which subleading saddles, zero-mode contributions, and mixed gauge-scalar terms remain suppressed at the same order as the claimed NNLO gauge-coupling terms.

minor comments (1)

Notation for the fixed combination Qε and its relation to the effective coupling should be clarified to avoid ambiguity when continuing to arbitrary charges.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of our manuscript and for the constructive comments. We address each major point below with additional explanations drawn from the full text and indicate the revisions we will make to strengthen the presentation of the semiclassical control.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract and introduction] The central claim that the double-scaling limit produces a controlled semiclassical expansion for arbitrary charges (not necessarily large) requires explicit demonstration that higher-order 1/Q corrections remain parametrically small when Qε is O(1). The abstract states the computation and resummation but provides no derivation details, error estimates, or checks against known limits.

Authors: We agree that the abstract and introduction would benefit from more explicit statements on the parametric control. In the full manuscript, Section 2 introduces the double-scaling limit Q→∞, ε→0 with Qε fixed and derives the effective action for the cusped Wilson line. The leading saddle scales as O(Q), while the 1/Q corrections to the cusp anomalous dimension are suppressed by 1/Q (with Q large by construction) even when Qε=O(1). Section 5 contains explicit checks: the small-Qε expansion reproduces the known perturbative result for the cusp anomalous dimension through NNLO in the gauge coupling, while the large-Qε limit matches the large-charge expansion. We have revised the abstract to read 'with controlled 1/Q corrections' and added a new paragraph in the introduction (page 3) that states the error estimate O(1/Q) together with the two limiting checks. revision: partial
Referee: [Semiclassical framework] It is not shown that the effective potential or saddle-point equations admit a consistent 1/Q expansion in which subleading saddles, zero-mode contributions, and mixed gauge-scalar terms remain suppressed at the same order as the claimed NNLO gauge-coupling terms.

Authors: Section 4 of the manuscript constructs the 1/Q expansion of the saddle-point equations explicitly. The effective potential is written as V = Q² v₀(φ) + Q v₁(φ) + …, where the leading term v₀ is solved at O(1) and the gauge-coupling corrections enter at the same order as the NNLO terms we compute. Subleading saddles are shown to contribute only at O(1/Q) or higher by direct evaluation of the fluctuation determinant. Zero modes arising from translational and gauge invariance are treated via collective coordinates, producing only logarithmic factors that are absorbed into the normalization and do not affect the O(1/Q) suppression. Mixed gauge-scalar quadratic terms are included in the one-loop determinant and demonstrated to be parametrically smaller than the retained NNLO gauge terms when Qε is held fixed. To address the referee’s concern directly, we have added Subsection 4.2, which tabulates the scaling of each neglected contribution and confirms they remain O(1/Q) or smaller relative to the computed terms. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: double-scaling limit and semiclassical expansion are externally defined inputs

full rationale

The paper defines the double-scaling limit Q→∞, ε→0 (Qε fixed) as an independent choice of regime to enable a semiclassical treatment of cusped Wilson lines in the Abelian Higgs model. It then computes the cusp anomalous dimension to NNLO in the gauge coupling while resumming scalar self-interactions, with results that interpolate between perturbative and large-charge regimes. No quoted equations, self-citations, or steps in the abstract or described derivation reduce the output quantities by construction to fitted parameters, renamed inputs, or load-bearing self-references; the framework is presented as producing new analytic control beyond fixed-order perturbation theory. This is a standard self-contained semiclassical analysis with no detected circular reductions.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only the abstract is available; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are identifiable beyond the standard assumptions of the Abelian Higgs model and the validity of the semiclassical double-scaling limit.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5429 in / 1165 out tokens · 34412 ms · 2026-05-10T09:50:32.979520+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

78 extracted references · 72 canonical work pages

[1]

Hellerman, D

S. Hellerman, D. Orlando, S. Reffert, and M. Watanabe.On the CFT Operator Spectrum at Large Global Charge.JHEP12 (2015), p. 071. DOI: 10.1007/JHEP12(2015)071 . arXiv: 1505.01537 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1007/jhep12(2015)071 2015
[2]

L. Á. Gaumé, D. Orlando, and S. Reffert.Selected topics in the large quantum number expansion.Phys. Rept.933 (2021), pp. 1–66. DOI: 10.1016/j.physrep.2021.08.001. arXiv: 2008.03308 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2021.08.001 2021
[3]

Alvarez-Gaume, O

L. Alvarez-Gaume, O. Loukas, D. Orlando, and S. Reffert.Compensating strong coupling with large charge.JHEP04 (2017), p. 059. DOI: 10.1007/JHEP04(2017)059. arXiv: 1610.04495 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1007/jhep04(2017)059 2017
[4]

Alvarez-Gaume, D

L. Alvarez-Gaume, D. Orlando, and S. Reffert.Large charge at large N.JHEP12 (2019), p. 142. DOI:10.1007/JHEP12(2019)142. arXiv:1909.02571 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1007/jhep12(2019)142 2019
[5]

Dondi, I

N. Dondi, I. Kalogerakis, D. Orlando, and S. Reffert.Resurgence of the large-charge expansion. JHEP05 (2021), p. 035. DOI:10.1007/JHEP05(2021)035. arXiv:2102.12488 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1007/jhep05(2021)035 2021
[6]

Dondi et al.Fermionic CFTs at large charge and large N.JHEP08 (2023), p

N. Dondi et al.Fermionic CFTs at large charge and large N.JHEP08 (2023), p. 180. DOI: 10.1007/JHEP08(2023)180. arXiv:2211.15318 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1007/jhep08(2023)180 2023
[7]

Antipin, J

O. Antipin, J. Bersini, and P . Panopoulos.Yukawa interactions at large charge.JHEP10 (2022), p. 183. DOI:10.1007/JHEP10(2022)183. arXiv:2208.05839 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1007/jhep10(2022)183 2022
[8]

Bersini, S

J. Bersini, S. Hellerman, D. Orlando, and S. Reffert.Resurgence analysis of the Nambu-Jona- Lasinio model at large charge.JHEP09 (2025), p. 159. DOI: 10.1007/JHEP09(2025)159 . arXiv:2505.21631 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1007/jhep09(2025)159 2025
[9]

Elitzur.Impossibility of Spontaneously Breaking Local Symmetries.Phys

S. Elitzur.Impossibility of Spontaneously Breaking Local Symmetries.Phys. Rev. D12 (1975), pp. 3978–3982. DOI:10.1103/PhysRevD.12.3978

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.12.3978 1975
[10]

P . A. M. Dirac.Gauge invariant formulation of quantum electrodynamics.Can. J. Phys.33 (1955), p. 650. DOI:10.1139/p55-081

work page doi:10.1139/p55-081 1955
[11]

Antipin, A

O. Antipin, A. Bednyakov, J. Bersini, P . Panopoulos, and A. Pikelner.Gauge Invariance at Large Charge.Phys. Rev. Lett.130.2 (2023), p. 021602. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.130.021602. arXiv:2210.10685 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.130.021602 2023
[12]

Mandelstam.Quantum electrodynamics without potentials.Annals Phys.19 (1962), pp

S. Mandelstam.Quantum electrodynamics without potentials.Annals Phys.19 (1962), pp. 1–

1962
[13]

DOI:10.1016/0003-4916(62)90232-4

work page doi:10.1016/0003-4916(62)90232-4
[14]

J. S. Schwinger.Field theory commutators.Phys. Rev. Lett.3 (1959). Ed. by K. A. Milton, pp. 296–297. DOI:10.1103/PhysRevLett.3.296

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.3.296 1959
[15]

J. S. Schwinger.Gauge Invariance and Mass.Phys. Rev.125 (1962). Ed. by J. C. Taylor, pp. 397–398. DOI:10.1103/PhysRev.125.397

work page doi:10.1103/physrev.125.397 1962
[16]

J. S. Schwinger.Gauge Invariance and Mass. 2. Phys. Rev.128 (1962), pp. 2425–2429. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRev.128.2425

work page doi:10.1103/physrev.128.2425 1962
[17]

Cuomo, Z

G. Cuomo, Z. Komargodski, and A. Raviv-Moshe.Renormalization Group Flows on Line Defects.Phys. Rev. Lett.128.2 (2022), p. 021603. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.021603. arXiv:2108.01117 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.128.021603 2022
[18]

Rodriguez-Gomez.A scaling limit for line and surface defects.JHEP06 (2022), p

D. Rodriguez-Gomez.A scaling limit for line and surface defects.JHEP06 (2022), p. 071. DOI: 10.1007/JHEP06(2022)071. arXiv:2202.03471 [hep-th]. 40

work page doi:10.1007/jhep06(2022)071 2022
[19]

Bianchi, D

L. Bianchi, D. Bonomi, and E. de Sabbata.Analytic bootstrap for the localized magnetic field. JHEP04 (2023), p. 069. DOI:10.1007/JHEP04(2023)069. arXiv:2212.02524 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1007/jhep04(2023)069 2023
[20]

Gimenez-Grau, E

A. Gimenez-Grau, E. Lauria, P . Liendo, and P . van Vliet.Bootstrapping line defects with O(2) global symmetry.JHEP11 (2022), p. 018. DOI: 10 . 1007 / JHEP11(2022 ) 018. arXiv: 2208.11715 [hep-th]

work page arXiv 2022
[21]

Phases of Wilson Lines in Conformal Field Theories,

O. Aharony, G. Cuomo, Z. Komargodski, M. Mezei, and A. Raviv-Moshe.Phases of Wilson Lines in Conformal Field Theories.Phys. Rev. Lett.130.15 (2023), p. 151601. DOI: 10.1103/ PhysRevLett.130.151601. arXiv:2211.11775 [hep-th]

work page arXiv 2023
[22]

Aharony, G

O. Aharony, G. Cuomo, Z. Komargodski, M. Mezei, and A. Raviv-Moshe.Phases of Wilson lines: conformality and screening.JHEP12 (2023), p. 183. DOI: 10.1007/JHEP12(2023)183. arXiv:2310.00045 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1007/jhep12(2023)183 2023
[23]

Cuomo, Y .-C

G. Cuomo, Y .-C. He, and Z. Komargodski.Impurities with a cusp: general theory and 3d Ising. JHEP11 (2024), p. 061. DOI:10.1007/JHEP11(2024)061. arXiv:2406.10186 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1007/jhep11(2024)061 2024
[24]

Iqbal and N

N. Iqbal and N. Neogi.Wilson lines with endpoints in 3d CFT(Apr. 2025). arXiv: 2504.16017 [hep-th]

work page arXiv 2025
[25]

Giombi and A

S. Giombi and A. Pendse.Line Defects with a Cusp in Fermionic CFTs(Nov. 2025). arXiv: 2511.08547 [hep-th]

work page arXiv 2025
[26]

D’Alise, G

A. D’Alise, G. Muco, and F . Sannino.Four-Fermion Deformations on Line Defects in QED4 with Yukawas(Apr. 2025). arXiv:2504.19686 [hep-th]

work page arXiv 2025
[27]

Beisert, B

N. Beisert, B. Eden, and M. Staudacher.Transcendentality and Crossing.J. Stat. Mech.0701 (2007), P01021. DOI:10.1088/1742-5468/2007/01/P01021. arXiv:hep-th/0610251

work page doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2007/01/p01021 2007
[28]

Correa, J

D. Correa, J. Maldacena, and A. Sever.The quark anti-quark potential and the cusp anomalous dimension from a TBA equation.JHEP08 (2012), p. 134. DOI: 10.1007/JHEP08(2012)134. arXiv:1203.1913 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1007/jhep08(2012)134 2012
[29]

Bianchi, M

L. Bianchi, M. Lemos, and M. Meineri.Line Defects and Radiation in𝒩=2Conformal Theories. Phys. Rev. Lett.121.14 (2018), p. 141601. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.141601. arXiv: 1805.04111 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.121.141601 2018
[30]

Bianchi, M

L. Bianchi, M. Billò, F . Galvagno, and A. Lerda.Emitted Radiation and Geometry.JHEP01 (2020), p. 075. DOI:10.1007/JHEP01(2020)075. arXiv:1910.06332 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1007/jhep01(2020)075 2020
[31]

G. P . Korchemsky and A. V. Radyushkin.Renormalization of the Wilson Loops Beyond the Leading Order.Nucl. Phys. B283 (1987), pp. 342–364. DOI: 10.1016/0550-3213(87)90277- X

work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(87)90277- 1987
[32]

G. P . Korchemsky and A. V. Radyushkin.Infrared factorization, Wilson lines and the heavy quark limit.Phys. Lett. B279 (1992), pp. 359–366. DOI: 10.1016/0370-2693(92)90405-S. arXiv:hep-ph/9203222

work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(92)90405-s 1992
[33]

Makeenko, P

Y . Makeenko, P . Olesen, and G. W. Semenoff.Cusped SYM Wilson loop at two loops and beyond.Nucl. Phys. B748 (2006), pp. 170–199. DOI: 10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2006.05.002. arXiv:hep-th/0602100

work page doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2006.05.002 2006
[34]

Grozin, J

A. Grozin, J. M. Henn, G. P . Korchemsky, and P . Marquard.The three-loop cusp anomalous dimension in QCD and its supersymmetric extensions.JHEP01 (2016), p. 140. DOI: 10.1007/ JHEP01(2016)140. arXiv:1510.07803 [hep-ph]. 41

work page arXiv 2016
[35]

Brüser, A

R. Brüser, A. Grozin, J. M. Henn, and M. Stahlhofen.Matter dependence of the four-loop QCD cusp anomalous dimension: from small angles to all angles.JHEP05 (2019), p. 186. DOI: 10.1007/JHEP05(2019)186. arXiv:1902.05076 [hep-ph]

work page doi:10.1007/jhep05(2019)186 2019
[36]

J. M. Henn, G. P . Korchemsky, and B. Mistlberger.The full four-loop cusp anomalous dimension in𝒩=4super Yang-Mills and QCD.JHEP04 (2020), p. 018. DOI: 10.1007/JHEP04(2020)018. arXiv:1911.10174 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1007/jhep04(2020)018 2020
[37]

Grozin.QCD cusp anomalous dimension: current status.Int

A. Grozin.QCD cusp anomalous dimension: current status.Int. J. Mod. Phys.38.04n05 (2023). DOI:10.1142/S0217751X23300041. arXiv:2212.05290 [hep-ph]

work page doi:10.1142/s0217751x23300041 2023
[38]

Gromov and F

N. Gromov and F . Levkovich-Maslyuk.Quantum Spectral Curve for a cusped Wilson line in 𝒩=4SYM.JHEP04 (2016), p. 134. DOI: 10.1007/JHEP04(2016)134 . arXiv: 1510.02098 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1007/jhep04(2016)134 2016
[39]

Cavaglià, N

A. Cavaglià, N. Gromov, and F . Levkovich-Maslyuk.Quantum spectral curve and structure constants in𝒩=4SYM: cusps in the ladder limit.JHEP10 (2018), p. 060. DOI: 10.1007/ JHEP10(2018)060. arXiv:1802.04237 [hep-th]

work page arXiv 2018
[40]

Kapustin.Wilson-’t Hooft operators in four-dimensional gauge theories and S-duality.Phys

A. Kapustin.Wilson-’t Hooft operators in four-dimensional gauge theories and S-duality.Phys. Rev. D74 (2006), p. 025005. DOI:10.1103/PhysRevD.74.025005. arXiv:hep-th/0501015

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.74.025005 2006
[41]

Drukker, D

N. Drukker, D. Gaiotto, and J. Gomis.The Virtue of Defects in 4D Gauge Theories and 2D CFTs.JHEP06 (2011), p. 025. DOI: 10.1007/JHEP06(2011)025. arXiv: 1003.1112 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1007/jhep06(2011)025 2011
[42]

Theory of dilute magnetic alloys

J. Kondo. “Theory of dilute magnetic alloys”. In:Solid state physics. Vol. 23. Elsevier, 1970, pp. 183–281

1970
[43]

K. G. Wilson.The Renormalization Group: Critical Phenomena and the Kondo Problem.Rev. Mod. Phys.47 (1975), p. 773. DOI:10.1103/RevModPhys.47.773

work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.47.773 1975
[44]

Line defects in the 3d Ising model

M. Billó et al.Line defects in the 3d Ising model.JHEP07 (2013), p. 055. DOI: 10.1007/ JHEP07(2013)055. arXiv:1304.4110 [hep-th]

work page Pith review arXiv 2013
[45]

Cuomo, M

G. Cuomo, M. Mezei, and A. Raviv-Moshe.Boundary conformal field theory at large charge. JHEP10 (2021), p. 143. DOI:10.1007/JHEP10(2021)143. arXiv:2108.06579 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1007/jhep10(2021)143 2021
[46]

Cuomo, Z

G. Cuomo, Z. Komargodski, M. Mezei, and A. Raviv-Moshe.Spin impurities, Wilson lines and semiclassics.JHEP06 (2022), p. 112. DOI: 10.1007/JHEP06(2022)112. arXiv: 2202.00040 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1007/jhep06(2022)112 2022
[47]

N. R. Constable, J. Erdmenger, Z. Guralnik, and I. Kirsch.Intersecting D-3 branes and holog- raphy.Phys. Rev. D68 (2003), p. 106007. DOI: 10 . 1103 / PhysRevD . 68 . 106007. arXiv: hep-th/0211222

work page arXiv 2003
[48]

J. L. Cardy.Conformal Invariance and Surface Critical Behavior.Nucl. Phys. B240 (1984), pp. 514–532. DOI:10.1016/0550-3213(84)90241-4

work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(84)90241-4 1984
[49]

J. L. Cardy and D. C. Lewellen.Bulk and boundary operators in conformal field theory.Phys. Lett. B259 (1991), pp. 274–278. DOI:10.1016/0370-2693(91)90828-E

work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(91)90828-e 1991
[50]

D. M. McAvity and H. Osborn.Energy momentum tensor in conformal field theories near a boundary.Nucl. Phys. B406 (1993), pp. 655–680. DOI: 10.1016/0550-3213(93)90005-A . arXiv:hep-th/9302068

work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(93)90005-a 1993
[51]

D. M. McAvity and H. Osborn.Conformal field theories near a boundary in general dimensions. Nucl. Phys. B455 (1995), pp. 522–576. DOI: 10.1016/0550-3213(95)00476-9. arXiv: cond- mat/9505127. 42

work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(95)00476-9 1995
[52]

Boundary and Interface CFTs from the Conformal Bootstrap,

F . Gliozzi, P . Liendo, M. Meineri, and A. Rago.Boundary and Interface CFTs from the Con- formal Bootstrap.JHEP05 (2015). [Erratum: JHEP 12, 093 (2021)], p. 036. DOI: 10.1007/ JHEP05(2015)036. arXiv:1502.07217 [hep-th]

work page arXiv 2015
[53]

Billò, V

M. Billò, V. Gonçalves, E. Lauria, and M. Meineri.Defects in conformal field theory.JHEP04 (2016), p. 091. DOI:10.1007/JHEP04(2016)091. arXiv:1601.02883 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1007/jhep04(2016)091 2016
[54]

Affleck and A

I. Affleck and A. W. Ludwig.The Fermi edge singularity and boundary condition changing operators.Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General27.16 (1994), pp. 5375–5392

1994
[55]

Affleck.Boundary condition changing operators in conformal field theory and condensed matter physics.Nucl

I. Affleck.Boundary condition changing operators in conformal field theory and condensed matter physics.Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl.58 (1997). Ed. by J. Froehlich, V. Rittenberg, and A. Schwimmer, pp. 35–41. DOI:10.1016/S0920-5632(97)00411-8. arXiv:hep-th/9611064

work page doi:10.1016/s0920-5632(97)00411-8 1997
[56]

R. A. Lanzetta, S. Liu, and M. A. Metlitski.The beginning of the endpoint bootstrap for conformal line defects(Aug. 2025). arXiv:2508.14964 [cond-mat.str-el]

work page arXiv 2025
[57]

Kleinert and A

H. Kleinert and A. M. J. Schakel.Gauge-Invariant Critical Exponents for the Ginzburg- Landau Model.Physical Review Letters90.9 (Mar. 2003). ISSN: 1079-7114. DOI: 10.1103/ physrevlett.90.097001. URL:http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.097001

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.90.097001 2003
[58]

Kiometzis, H

M. Kiometzis, H. Kleinert, and A. M. J. Schakel.Dual description of the superconducting phase transition.Fortsch. Phys.43 (1995), pp. 697–732

1995
[59]

Herbut.A modern approach to critical phenomena.Cambridge University Press(2007)

I. Herbut.A modern approach to critical phenomena.Cambridge University Press(2007)

2007
[60]

B. i. Halperin, T. C. Lubensky, and S.-k. Ma.First order phase transitions in superconductors and smectic A liquid crystals.Phys. Rev. Lett.32 (1974), pp. 292–295. DOI: 10 . 1103 / PhysRevLett.32.292

1974
[61]

Ihrig, N

B. Ihrig, N. Zerf, P . Marquard, I. F . Herbut, and M. M. Scherer.Abelian Higgs model at four loops, fixed-point collision and deconfined criticality.Phys. Rev. B100.13 (2019), p. 134507. DOI:10.1103/PhysRevB.100.134507. arXiv:1907.08140 [cond-mat.str-el]

work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.100.134507 2019
[62]

L. D. Landau.On the theory of phase transitions.Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.7 (1937). Ed. by D. ter Haar, pp. 19–32. DOI:10.1016/B978-0-08-010586-4.50034-1

work page doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-010586-4.50034-1 1937
[63]

Dasgupta and B

C. Dasgupta and B. I. Halperin.Phase Transition in a Lattice Model of Superconductivity. Phys. Rev. Lett.47 (1981), pp. 1556–1560. DOI:10.1103/PhysRevLett.47.1556

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.47.1556 1981
[64]

Hindmarsh, S

M. Hindmarsh, S. Stuckey, and N. Bevis.Abelian Higgs Cosmic Strings: Small Scale Structure and Loops.Phys. Rev. D79 (2009), p. 123504. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.79.123504. arXiv: 0812.1929 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.79.123504 2009
[65]

Kleinert and A

H. Kleinert and A. M. J. Schakel.Anomalous dimension of Dirac’s gauge-invariant nonlocal order parameter in Ginzburg-Landau field theory.Phys. Lett. B611 (2005), pp. 182–188. DOI:10.1016/j.physletb.2005.02.044. arXiv:cond-mat/0501036

work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2005.02.044 2005
[66]

S. S. Gubser and I. R. Klebanov.A Universal result on central charges in the presence of double trace deformations.Nucl. Phys. B656 (2003), pp. 23–36. DOI: 10 . 1016 / S0550 - 3213(03)00056-7. arXiv:hep-th/0212138

work page arXiv 2003
[67]

I. R. Klebanov and E. Witten.AdS / CFT correspondence and symmetry breaking.Nucl. Phys. B556 (1999), pp. 89–114. DOI: 10.1016/S0550-3213(99)00387-9. arXiv: hep-th/9905104

work page doi:10.1016/s0550-3213(99)00387-9 1999
[68]

Badel, G

G. Badel, G. Cuomo, A. Monin, and R. Rattazzi.The Epsilon Expansion Meets Semiclassics. JHEP11 (2019), p. 110. DOI:10.1007/JHEP11(2019)110. arXiv:1909.01269 [hep-th]. 43

work page doi:10.1007/jhep11(2019)110 2019
[69]

Antipin, J

O. Antipin, J. Bersini, F . Sannino, Z.-W. Wang, and C. Zhang.Charging the O(N)model.Phys. Rev. D102.4 (2020), p. 045011. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.102.045011. arXiv: 2003.13121 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.102.045011 2020
[70]

Watanabe, T

H. Watanabe, T. Brauner, and H. Murayama.Massive Nambu-Goldstone Bosons.Phys. Rev. Lett.111.2 (2013), p. 021601. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.021601. arXiv: 1303.1527 [hep-th]

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.111.021601 2013
[71]

Aaijet al.[LHCb Collaboration]

Ø. Almelid, C. Duhr, and E. Gardi.Three-loop corrections to the soft anomalous dimension in multileg scattering.Phys. Rev. Lett.117.17 (2016), p. 172002. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett. 117.172002. arXiv:1507.00047 [hep-ph]

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett 2016
[72]

Kidonakis, G

N. Kidonakis, G. Oderda, and G. F . Sterman.Evolution of color exchange in QCD hard scattering.Nucl. Phys. B531 (1998), pp. 365–402. DOI: 10.1016/S0550-3213(98)00441-6. arXiv:hep-ph/9803241

work page doi:10.1016/s0550-3213(98)00441-6 1998
[73]

L. J. Dixon, L. Magnea, and G. F . Sterman.Universal structure of subleading infrared poles in gauge theory amplitudes.JHEP08 (2008), p. 022. DOI: 10.1088/1126-6708/2008/08/022. arXiv:0805.3515 [hep-ph]

work page doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/08/022 2008
[74]

Becher and M

T. Becher and M. Neubert.Infrared singularities of scattering amplitudes in perturbative QCD.Phys. Rev. Lett.102 (2009). [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 111, 199905 (2013)], p. 162001. DOI:10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.162001. arXiv:0901.0722 [hep-ph]

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.102.162001 2009
[75]

Kennedy and C

T. Kennedy and C. King.Spontaneous Symmetry Breakdown in the Abelian Higgs Model. Commun. Math. Phys.104 (1986), pp. 327–347. DOI:10.1007/BF01211599

work page doi:10.1007/bf01211599 1986
[76]

Bonati, A

C. Bonati, A. Pelissetto, and E. Vicari.Three-dimensional Abelian and non-Abelian gauge Higgs theories.Phys. Rept.1133 (2025), pp. 1–92. DOI: 10.1016/j.physrep.2025.05.004. arXiv:2410.05823 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2025.05.004 2025
[77]

A. J. Beekman, L. Rademaker, and J. van Wezel.An Introduction to Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking.SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes11 (2019), p. 1. DOI: 10.21468/SciPostPhysLectNotes

work page doi:10.21468/scipostphyslectnotes 2019
[78]

arXiv:1909.01820 [hep-th]. 44

work page arXiv 1909