Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 4 minor 97 references

This paper establishes that, in the hyperbolic perturbative regime, the timelike entanglement first law is equivalent to the linearized field equations of Lovelock gravity.

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

2026-08-02 06:17 UTC pith:UNXQ576T

load-bearing objection Solid cubic Lovelock check; the arbitrary-order proof has an unsupported step — cite the cubic example, not the general theorem. the 1 major comments →

arxiv 2607.12834 v2 pith:UNXQ576T submitted 2026-07-14 hep-th gr-qc

Timelike Entanglement First Law and Linearized Field Equations in Higher Curvature Gravity

Mei-Hui Xiao , Guo-Ying Li , Song He , Jia-Rui Sun This is my paper
classification hep-th gr-qc
keywords timelike entanglement entropyentanglement first lawLovelock gravityJacobson-Myers functionalmodular Hamiltonianlinearized field equationsAdS/CFT correspondenceholographic entanglement entropy
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 asks whether the timelike entanglement first law—that for small perturbations of a timelike hyperbolic region the change in entanglement entropy equals the change in the modular Hamiltonian—survives when the bulk dual is a higher-curvature Lovelock gravity instead of Einstein gravity. It answers yes in a restricted but precise sense: for normalizable perturbations around AdS in Fefferman-Graham gauge, both ΔS and Δ⟨H⟩ equal the Einstein-gravity results multiplied by the same coupling-dependent factor, (1 − Σ_{m≥2} m λ_m f∞^{m−1}). Because that factor also renormalizes the effective Newton constant in the linearized Lovelock field equations, the paper concludes that the timelike entanglement first law is equivalent to the linearized field equations of Lovelock gravity about the maximally symmetric background. This matters because it extends a known Einstein-gravity equivalence between entanglement dynamics and bulk gravity to an entire class of higher-curvature theories, isolating the single coefficient that carries the higher-curvature correction.

Core claim

The central claim is that, in the hyperbolic and perturbative regime studied, the timelike entanglement first law holds in Lovelock gravity and is governed by one universal factor: ΔS and Δ⟨H⟩ each equal their Einstein-gravity counterparts multiplied by (1 − Σ_{m≥2} m λ_m f∞^{m−1}). The paper proves this by computing the variation of the Jacobson-Myers entropy functional on a double-Wick-rotated extremal surface and the variation of the modular Hamiltonian from the holographic stress tensor, showing both reduce to the Einstein results times the same factor for normalizable Fefferman-Graham perturbations, while the generalized boundary term vanishes in the conformal limit. Since this factor a

What carries the argument

Three ingredients carry the argument. First, the Jacobson-Myers entropy functional, which for Lovelock gravity depends only on the intrinsic curvature of the bulk surface and is therefore tractable under double Wick rotation. Second, the double Wick rotation prescription that converts a timelike hyperbolic subregion into a spacelike problem in a continued geometry, fixing the extremal surface and the modular Hamiltonian. Third, the Fefferman-Graham gauge with normalizable, transverse-traceless perturbations, which makes the boundary divergent terms vanish as O(ϵ²). The paper shows that the spherical embedding remains extremal at arbitrary Lovelock order through a first-integral condition on

Load-bearing premise

The spherical embedding f = const is assumed to extremize the Jacobson-Myers functional at arbitrary Lovelock order; the paper derives a first-integral condition but does not prove that the constant solution is uniquely selected by the boundary conditions.

What would settle it

Compute the first-integral condition (5.54) explicitly at quartic Lovelock order (m = 4) for a rotationally symmetric embedding: if ∂S/∂(dlog f/du) at g = 0 is not independent of u, the spherical solution is not extremal, and ΔS would deviate from the Einstein result times the claimed factor. A direct numerical extremization of the JM functional for a tiny non-spherical perturbation at nonzero λ₄ would settle the question.

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

If this is right

  • For cubic Lovelock gravity, low-energy thermal excitations obey ΔS = Δ⟨H⟩, generalizing the known Einstein-gravity result to a higher-curvature theory.
  • For arbitrary Lovelock order, normalizable Fefferman-Graham perturbations around AdS give ΔS and Δ⟨H⟩ equal to the Einstein results times the universal factor (1 − Σ_{m≥2} m λ_m f∞^{m−1}).
  • The generalized boundary term of the Jacobson-Myers functional does not contribute in the conformal limit for the considered class of perturbations.
  • Consequently, in the hyperbolic perturbative sector, the timelike entanglement first law is equivalent to the linearized Lovelock field equations about the maximally symmetric AdS background.
  • The effective entanglement temperature remains proportional to the inverse temporal size, matching the Einstein-gravity result, because the higher-curvature factor cancels between ΔS and Δ⟨H⟩.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the spherical embedding fails to extremize the Jacobson-Myers functional at some higher Lovelock order, the claimed factorization would break; this is directly testable by evaluating the first-integral condition at quartic order (m = 4).
  • The same coupling factor likely appears in other holographic first-law-type relations for Lovelock gravity, such as pseudo entropy or non-hyperbolic regions, offering a quick diagnostic of where the equivalence persists.
  • The result suggests that the equivalence between entanglement first laws and linearized bulk dynamics is not unique to Einstein gravity but holds for any theory whose linearized equations about a maximally symmetric background are Einstein-like with a rescaled coupling.
  • A natural next test is to allow non-normalizable perturbations or a non-conformally-flat boundary: the paper predicts the O(ϵ²) suppression, and hence the equivalence, may fail there.

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

1 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper claims that the timelike entanglement first law holds in Lovelock gravity for hyperbolic timelike subregions, within a perturbative regime around AdS. Using the double Wick rotation prescription together with the Jacobson–Myers entropy functional, the authors compute the first-order variation of holographic timelike entanglement entropy and compare it with the modular Hamiltonian obtained from the boundary stress tensor. In cubic Lovelock gravity the two variations agree and equal the Einstein-gravity result multiplied by a single coupling-dependent factor. For general Lovelock order and normalizable Fefferman–Graham perturbations around AdS, the paper argues that both ΔS and Δ⟨H⟩ are proportional to their Einstein counterparts with the same factor 1 − Σ_{m≥2} m λ_m f∞^{m−1}, which also renormalizes G_eff in the linearized Lovelock field equations. The generalized surface term is claimed to vanish in the conformal limit for this restricted class of perturbations.

Significance. If the general-order part is completed, the result is significant: it extends the known equivalence between the timelike entanglement first law and linearized Einstein equations to the entire Lovelock family, with no fitted parameters and with a single universal factor controlling both the entropy variation and the modular Hamiltonian. The cubic example in §3 is explicit and internally coherent: the JM variation, the surface term, the stress tensor, and the modular Hamiltonian are computed independently and the matching is nontrivial. The paper is also candid about its restrictions: normalizable FG perturbations, conformally flat fixed boundary, hyperbolic subregions, and the double-Wick-rotated JM prescription as a working rule rather than a derived Lorentzian replica prescription. However, the general-order proof rests on an incompletely justified claim that the spherical embedding f=const extremizes the JM functional at arbitrary Lovelock order; until that lemma is supplied, the factorization in (5.77) is conditional.

major comments (1)
  1. [§5.2, Eq. (5.54)] The step from the first-integral condition to f=const is not demonstrated. For a functional S(g,u) with g=dlog f/du, the Euler–Lagrange equation is d/du(∂S/∂g)=0, i.e. ∂S/∂g is constant in u. This does not imply g=0 unless one shows that ∂S/∂g evaluated at g=0 is u-independent and equals the integration constant fixed by the boundary conditions. The paper states that f=const solves (5.54) but does not provide this check. This is load-bearing: if the extremal surface were not the maximally symmetric embedding, the induced metric would not be (5.55)–(5.56) and the reduction ΔS = factor × ΔS_Einstein in (5.77) would fail. The missing check is likely straightforward — the induced metric (5.39) depends on g through γ_uu=(L²/sin²w)(g²+1/T0²), so the curvature invariants are plausibly even in g — but it should be written out explicitly rather than asserted.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§2.2 / §6] The double-Wick-rotated JM prescription is explicitly acknowledged as a working assumption, not derived from a Lorentzian replica construction. This is appropriate, but the abstract and conclusions could state more prominently that the physical interpretation of the result is conditional on this prescription.
  2. [§5.2] The notation S(g,u) is introduced only through the sentence preceding (5.54). Please define g explicitly as dlog f/du and state the endpoint conditions under which the first-integral constant is fixed. The phrase 'solved by f=const with the boundary conditions imposed above' is too terse for a lemma that is central to the general argument.
  3. [§3.2, Eqs. (3.28)–(3.31)] The explicit expressions for K, R∂K, R∂abK^{ab}, etc., are central to the cubic check but are presented as results of substitution with no intermediate algebra. A short appendix entry or a few displayed intermediate steps would improve verifiability.
  4. [Text and typos] There are numerous typographical and grammatical slips: 'R´enyi' in the Introduction, 'et al and their holographic descriptions' in §1, 'formax=3' in §4, 'the parameter m_z affects only terms of order O(w_ϵ²)' with a missing verb, and inconsistent spacing around equations. These do not affect the physics but should be cleaned up.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: the Lovelock prefactors multiplying the Einstein entropy and modular Hamiltonian are independently computed, and the match with the linearized equations is a derived consequence rather than a fitted input.

full rationale

No significant circularity found. The central claim is obtained by computing two separate quantities in Lovelock gravity — the variation of the Jacobson-Myers entropy functional (eq. 5.77) and the variation of the holographic modular Hamiltonian from the boundary stress tensor (eq. 5.31) — and showing that each equals its Einstein-gravity counterpart multiplied by the same coupling-dependent factor 1 - Σ_{m≥2} m λ_m f∞^{m-1}. That factor is obtained algebraically from the Lovelock action and the maximally symmetric AdS background; it is not fitted to the equality ΔS = Δ⟨H⟩. The same factor appears independently in the linearized Lovelock field equations (eqs. 4.9-4.10), so the claimed equivalence is a logical consequence of the calculations, not a definitional identity. The paper does rely on [74], a prior paper by the same group, for the Einstein-gravity timelike entanglement first law and the double-Wick-rotated modular Hamiltonian; this is self-citation, but it is a separate published theorem and is used as a base case, not as an input tuned to reproduce the Lovelock result. The paper also explicitly states its domain assumptions — the double Wick rotation prescription, normalizable Fefferman-Graham perturbations, and hyperbolic subregions — and these are limitations on scope rather than hidden circular assumptions. The extremal-surface proof in §5.2 derives the spherical embedding f=const from the first-integral condition rather than imposing it as an input. Overall, no step in the derivation reduces to an equivalent form of the claimed conclusion by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

No numbers are fitted: the Lovelock couplings are theory inputs, and the first-law equality holds for arbitrary values in the perturbative regime. The main axioms are the choice of entropy functional, the timelike continuation prescription, and the normalizable/FG/hyperbolic domain restrictions. The spherical-embedding extremality is used as a premise because the proof in §5.2 is incomplete as written.

axioms (6)
  • domain assumption Jacobson-Myers functional (2.9) is the correct holographic entanglement entropy for Lovelock gravity
    Supported by anomaly tests in refs. [79,81]; assumed throughout, not re-derived.
  • domain assumption Timelike entanglement entropy is obtained by double Wick rotation and extremizing the continued JM functional
    Adopted as working prescription in §2.2; the paper states no Lorentzian replica derivation is attempted.
  • domain assumption Perturbations are small, normalizable, in FG gauge, with fixed conformally flat boundary metric; then δh̃μν = z^d δh̃(d)μν + ...
    Section 5, eqs. (5.2)-(5.3); the paper explicitly restricts its theorem to this class.
  • domain assumption The modular Hamiltonian for the hyperbolic timelike region is (2.14), taken from [74]
    Fixed by conformal transformation; the same form as the Einstein case because the boundary is conformally flat.
  • ad hoc to paper The spherical embedding f=const extremizes the JM functional at arbitrary Lovelock order
    Claimed and sketched in §5.2; the first-integral derivation does not fully justify the solution, so the premise is load-bearing.
  • domain assumption Lovelock couplings λ_m are small so the AdS root f∞ is continuously connected to the Einstein root f∞=1
    Section 2.1; needed for the perturbative expansion and identification of the correct vacuum branch.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 32248 in / 22585 out tokens · 224736 ms · 2026-08-02T06:17:47.054746+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We investigate the timelike entanglement first law in holographic conformal field theories whose bulk dual is Lovelock gravity. Using the double Wick rotation formulation of timelike entanglement entropy together with the Jacobson-Myers entropy functional, we compute the linear variation of holographic timelike entanglement entropy for hyperbolic subregions. For cubic Lovelock gravity, we explicitly show that a single, universal multiplicative renormalization factor governs how higher curvature interactions enter the variations of both the entropy and the modular Hamiltonian, leading to $\Delta S=\Delta\langle H\rangle$ for low-energy thermal excitations. We then extend the analysis to Lovelock gravity of arbitrary order around the anti-de Sitter spacetime in the Fefferman-Graham gauge. For normalizable perturbations, the variation of the Jacobson-Myers functional reduces to the Einstein gravity's result multiplied by the same coupling-dependent factor that renormalizes the effective Newtonian constant in the linearized field equations of Lovelock gravity. We further show that the boundary contribution vanishes in the conformal limit for the class of perturbations considered. Consequently, the timelike entanglement first law is equivalent to the linearized field equations of Lovelock gravity about the maximally symmetric background, within the hyperbolic and perturbative regime considered in the present paper.

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

97 extracted references · 78 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Calabrese and J.L

    P. Calabrese and J.L. Cardy,Entanglement entropy and quantum field theory,J. Stat. Mech. 0406(2004) P06002 [hep-th/0405152]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  2. [2]

    Levin and X.-G

    M. Levin and X.-G. Wen,Detecting Topological Order in a Ground State Wave Function, Phys. Rev. Lett.96(2006) 110405 [cond-mat/0510613]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  3. [3]

    Kitaev and J

    A. Kitaev and J. Preskill,Topological entanglement entropy,Phys. Rev. Lett.96(2006) 110404 [hep-th/0510092]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  4. [4]

    Casini and M

    H. Casini and M. Huerta,Lectures on entanglement in quantum field theory,PoST ASI2021 (2023) 002 [2201.13310]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  5. [5]

    Van Raamsdonk,Building up spacetime with quantum entanglement,Gen

    M. Van Raamsdonk,Building up spacetime with quantum entanglement,Gen. Rel. Grav.42 (2010) 2323 [1005.3035]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  6. [6]

    Maldacena and L

    J. Maldacena and L. Susskind,Cool horizons for entangled black holes,Fortsch. Phys.61 (2013) 781 [1306.0533]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  7. [7]

    Almheiri, T

    A. Almheiri, T. Hartman, J. Maldacena, E. Shaghoulian and A. Tajdini,The entropy of Hawking radiation,Rev. Mod. Phys.93(2021) 035002 [2006.06872]. – 36 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  8. [8]

    Maldacena,The LargeNlimit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,Adv

    J.M. Maldacena,The LargeNlimit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2(1998) 231 [hep-th/9711200]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  9. [9]

    Gubser, I.R

    S.S. Gubser, I.R. Klebanov and A.M. Polyakov,Gauge theory correlators from noncritical string theory,Phys. Lett. B428(1998) 105 [hep-th/9802109]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  10. [10]

    Witten,Anti de Sitter space and holography,Adv

    E. Witten,Anti de Sitter space and holography,Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2(1998) 253 [hep-th/9802150]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  11. [11]

    Ryu and T

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  12. [12]

    Hubeny, M

    V.E. Hubeny, M. Rangamani and T. Takayanagi,A Covariant holographic entanglement entropy proposal,JHEP07(2007) 062 [0705.0016]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  13. [13]

    Lewkowycz and J

    A. Lewkowycz and J. Maldacena,Generalized gravitational entropy,JHEP08(2013) 090 [1304.4926]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  14. [14]

    Casini, M

    H. Casini, M. Huerta and R.C. Myers,Towards a derivation of holographic entanglement entropy,JHEP05(2011) 036 [1102.0440]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  15. [15]

    X. Dong, A. Lewkowycz and M. Rangamani,Deriving covariant holographic entanglement, JHEP11(2016) 028 [1607.07506]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  16. [16]

    Swingle,Entanglement Renormalization and Holography,Phys

    B. Swingle,Entanglement Renormalization and Holography,Phys. Rev. D86(2012) 065007 [0905.1317]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  17. [17]

    Pastawski, B

    F. Pastawski, B. Yoshida, D. Harlow and J. Preskill,Holographic quantum error-correcting codes: Toy models for the bulk/boundary correspondence,JHEP06(2015) 149 [1503.06237]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  18. [18]

    X. Dong, D. Harlow and A.C. Wall,Reconstruction of Bulk Operators within the Entanglement Wedge in Gauge-Gravity Duality,Phys. Rev. Lett.117(2016) 021601 [1601.05416]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  19. [19]

    Lin, J.-R

    Y.-Y. Lin, J.-R. Sun and Y. Sun,Surface growth scheme for bulk reconstruction and tensor network,JHEP12(2020) 083 [2010.01907]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  20. [20]

    Liang, J.-R

    H.-C. Liang, J.-R. Sun and Y. Sun,Surface growth scheme for bulk reconstruction andT ¯T deformation,2507.18435

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  21. [21]

    Bhattacharya, M

    J. Bhattacharya, M. Nozaki, T. Takayanagi and T. Ugajin,Thermodynamical property of entanglement entropy for excited states,Physical Review Letters110(2013) 091602

    2013

  22. [22]

    Swingle and M

    B. Swingle and M. Van Raamsdonk,Universality of Gravity from Entanglement,1405.2933

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  23. [23]

    Nozaki, T

    M. Nozaki, T. Numasawa, A. Prudenziati and T. Takayanagi,Dynamics of Entanglement Entropy from Einstein Equation,Phys. Rev. D88(2013) 026012 [1304.7100]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  24. [24]

    He, J.-R

    S. He, J.-R. Sun and H.-Q. Zhang,On Holographic Entanglement Entropy with Second Order Excitations,Nucl. Phys. B928(2018) 160 [1411.6213]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  25. [25]

    de Boer, M.P

    J. de Boer, M.P. Heller, R.C. Myers and Y. Neiman,Holographic de Sitter Geometry from Entanglement in Conformal Field Theory,Phys. Rev. Lett.116(2016) 061602 [1509.00113]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  26. [26]

    de Boer, F.M

    J. de Boer, F.M. Haehl, M.P. Heller and R.C. Myers,Entanglement, holography and causal diamonds,JHEP08(2016) 162 [1606.03307]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  27. [27]

    Haehl, E

    F.M. Haehl, E. Hijano, O. Parrikar and C. Rabideau,Higher Curvature Gravity from Entanglement in Conformal Field Theories,Phys. Rev. Lett.120(2018) 201602 [1712.06620]. – 37 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  28. [28]

    W.-z. Guo, S. He and J. Tao,Note on Entanglement Temperature for Low Thermal Excited States in Higher Derivative Gravity,JHEP08(2013) 050 [1305.2682]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  29. [29]

    Blanco, H

    D.D. Blanco, H. Casini, L.-Y. Hung and R.C. Myers,Relative Entropy and Holography, JHEP08(2013) 060 [1305.3182]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  30. [30]

    Bhattacharya and T

    J. Bhattacharya and T. Takayanagi,Entropic Counterpart of Perturbative Einstein Equation, JHEP10(2013) 219 [1308.3792]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  31. [31]

    Lashkari, M.B

    N. Lashkari, M.B. McDermott and M. Van Raamsdonk,Gravitational dynamics from entanglement ’thermodynamics’,JHEP04(2014) 195 [1308.3716]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  32. [32]

    Faulkner, M

    T. Faulkner, M. Guica, T. Hartman, R.C. Myers and M. Van Raamsdonk,Gravitation from Entanglement in Holographic CFTs,JHEP03(2014) 051 [1312.7856]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  33. [33]

    Bekenstein,Black holes and entropy,Phys

    J.D. Bekenstein,Black holes and entropy,Phys. Rev. D7(1973) 2333

    1973

  34. [34]

    Bardeen, B

    J.M. Bardeen, B. Carter and S.W. Hawking,The Four laws of black hole mechanics, Commun. Math. Phys.31(1973) 161

    1973

  35. [35]

    Hawking,Particle Creation by Black Holes,Commun

    S.W. Hawking,Particle Creation by Black Holes,Commun. Math. Phys.43(1975) 199

    1975

  36. [36]

    Jacobson,Thermodynamics of space-time: The Einstein equation of state,Phys

    T. Jacobson,Thermodynamics of space-time: The Einstein equation of state,Phys. Rev. Lett.75(1995) 1260 [gr-qc/9504004]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  37. [37]

    Faulkner, F.M

    T. Faulkner, F.M. Haehl, E. Hijano, O. Parrikar, C. Rabideau and M. Van Raamsdonk, Nonlinear Gravity from Entanglement in Conformal Field Theories,JHEP08(2017) 057 [1705.03026]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  38. [38]

    E. Oh, I.Y. Park and S.-J. Sin,Complete Einstein equations from the generalized First Law of Entanglement,Phys. Rev. D98(2018) 026020 [1709.05752]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  39. [39]

    Hung, R.C

    L.-Y. Hung, R.C. Myers, M. Smolkin and A. Yale,Holographic Calculations of Renyi Entropy,JHEP12(2011) 047 [1110.1084]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  40. [40]

    Dong,The Gravity Dual of Renyi Entropy,Nature Commun.7(2016) 12472 [1601.06788]

    X. Dong,The Gravity Dual of Renyi Entropy,Nature Commun.7(2016) 12472 [1601.06788]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  41. [41]

    Takayanagi and K

    T. Takayanagi and K. Umemoto,Entanglement of purification through holographic duality, Nature Phys.14(2018) 573 [1708.09393]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  42. [42]

    Lin, J.-R

    Y.-Y. Lin, J.-R. Sun and Y. Sun,Bit thread, entanglement distillation, and entanglement of purification,Phys. Rev. D103(2021) 126002 [2012.05737]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  43. [43]

    Wen,Fine structure in holographic entanglement and entanglement contour,Phys

    Q. Wen,Fine structure in holographic entanglement and entanglement contour,Phys. Rev. D 98(2018) 106004 [1803.05552]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  44. [44]

    Lin, J.-R

    Y.-Y. Lin, J.-R. Sun, Y. Sun and J.-C. Jin,The PEE aspects of entanglement islands from bit threads,JHEP07(2022) 009 [2203.03111]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  45. [45]

    L.-H. Mo, Y. Zhou, J.-R. Sun and P. Ye,The hyperfine structure of quantum entanglement, Commun. Theor. Phys.78(2026) 085103 [2311.01997]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  46. [46]

    Nakata, T

    Y. Nakata, T. Takayanagi, Y. Taki, K. Tamaoka and Z. Wei,New holographic generalization of entanglement entropy,Phys. Rev. D103(2021) 026005 [2005.13801]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  47. [47]

    Mollabashi, N

    A. Mollabashi, N. Shiba, T. Takayanagi, K. Tamaoka and Z. Wei,Pseudo Entropy in Free Quantum Field Theories,Phys. Rev. Lett.126(2021) 081601 [2011.09648]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  48. [48]

    Mollabashi, N

    A. Mollabashi, N. Shiba, T. Takayanagi, K. Tamaoka and Z. Wei,Aspects of pseudoentropy in field theories,Phys. Rev. Res.3(2021) 033254 [2106.03118]. – 38 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  49. [49]

    K. Doi, J. Harper, A. Mollabashi, T. Takayanagi and Y. Taki,Pseudoentropy in dS/CFT and Timelike Entanglement Entropy,Phys. Rev. Lett.130(2023) 031601 [2210.09457]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  50. [50]

    K. Doi, J. Harper, A. Mollabashi, T. Takayanagi and Y. Taki,Timelike entanglement entropy,JHEP05(2023) 052 [2302.11695]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  51. [51]

    Narayan,de Sitter space, extremal surfaces, and time entanglement,Phys

    K. Narayan,de Sitter space, extremal surfaces, and time entanglement,Phys. Rev. D107 (2023) 126004 [2210.12963]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  52. [52]

    Narayan,Further remarks on de Sitter space, extremal surfaces, and time entanglement, Phys

    K. Narayan,Further remarks on de Sitter space, extremal surfaces, and time entanglement, Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 086009 [2310.00320]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  53. [53]

    Nanda, K

    K.K. Nanda, K. Narayan, S. Porey and G. Yadav,dSextremal surfaces, replicas, boundary Renyi entropies indS/CF Tand time entanglement,2509.02775

    arXiv

  54. [54]

    Li, Z.-Q

    Z. Li, Z.-Q. Xiao and R.-Q. Yang,On holographic time-like entanglement entropy,JHEP04 (2023) 004 [2211.14883]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  55. [55]

    He and H.-Q

    P.-Z. He and H.-Q. Zhang,Holographic timelike entanglement entropy from Rindler method*, Chin. Phys. C48(2024) 115113 [2307.09803]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  56. [56]

    Jiang, P

    X. Jiang, P. Wang, H. Wu and H. Yang,Timelike entanglement entropy in dS 3/CFT2,JHEP 08(2023) 216 [2304.10376]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  57. [57]

    Jiang, P

    X. Jiang, P. Wang, H. Wu and H. Yang,Timelike entanglement entropy and TT¯ deformation,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 046004 [2302.13872]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  58. [58]

    W.-z. Guo, S. He and Y.-X. Zhang,Relation between time- and spacelike entanglement entropy,Phys. Rev. D112(2025) 086020 [2402.00268]

    arXiv 2025

  59. [59]

    Xu and W.-z

    J. Xu and W.-z. Guo,Imaginary part of timelike entanglement entropy,JHEP02(2025) 094 [2410.22684]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  60. [60]

    Maulik and S

    S. Maulik and S. Pari,Effective dynamics and quantum information in de Sitter wedge holography,2607.11848

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  61. [61]

    Anegawa and K

    T. Anegawa and K. Tamaoka,Black hole singularity and timelike entanglement,JHEP10 (2024) 182 [2406.10968]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  62. [62]

    Gong, W.-z

    X. Gong, W.-z. Guo and J. Xu,Entanglement measures for causally connected subregions and holography,2508.05158

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  63. [63]

    Nunez and D

    C. Nunez and D. Roychowdhury,Timelike entanglement entropy: A top-down approach, Phys. Rev. D112(2025) 026030 [2505.20388]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  64. [64]

    Nunez and D

    C. Nunez and D. Roychowdhury,Interpolating between spacelike and timelike entanglement via holography,Phys. Rev. D112(2025) L081902 [2507.17805]

    arXiv 2025

  65. [65]

    Nunez and D

    C. Nunez and D. Roychowdhury,Holographic Timelike Entanglement Across Dimensions, 2508.13266

    arXiv

  66. [66]

    Jiang, H

    X. Jiang, H. Wu and H. Yang,Timelike entanglement entropy Revisited,2503.19342

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  67. [67]

    Heller, F

    M.P. Heller, F. Ori and A. Serantes,Geometric Interpretation of Timelike Entanglement Entropy,Phys. Rev. Lett.134(2025) 131601 [2408.15752]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  68. [68]

    Heller, F

    M.P. Heller, F. Ori and A. Serantes,Temporal Entanglement from Holographic Entanglement Entropy,Phys. Rev. X15(2025) 041022 [2507.17847]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  69. [69]

    Chen,Complex-valued Holographic Pseudo Entropy via Real-time AdS/CFT Correspondence,2302.14303

    Z. Chen,Complex-valued Holographic Pseudo Entropy via Real-time AdS/CFT Correspondence,2302.14303. – 39 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  70. [70]

    Kanda, T

    H. Kanda, T. Kawamoto, Y.-k. Suzuki, T. Takayanagi, K. Tasuki and Z. Wei,Entanglement phase transition in holographic pseudo entropy,JHEP03(2024) 060 [2311.13201]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  71. [71]

    Caputa, B

    P. Caputa, B. Chen, T. Takayanagi and T. Tsuda,Thermal pseudo-entropy,JHEP01(2025) 003 [2411.08948]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  72. [72]

    Kanda, T

    H. Kanda, T. Takayanagi and Z. Wei,CFT derivation of entanglement phase transition in pseudo entropy,2602.22994

    arXiv

  73. [73]

    A. Das, S. Sachdeva and D. Sarkar,Bulk reconstruction using timelike entanglement in (A)dS,2312.16056

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  74. [74]

    Li, M.-H

    G.-Y. Li, M.-H. Xiao, S. He and J.-R. Sun,Entanglement first law for timelike entanglement entropy and linearized Einstein’s equation,JHEP06(2026) 144 [2511.17098]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  75. [75]

    Fujiki, M

    K. Fujiki, M. Kohara, K. Shimyo, Y.-k. Suzuki and T. Takayanagi,Entropic Interpretation of Einstein Equation in dS/CFT,2511.07915

    arXiv

  76. [76]

    Wald,Black hole entropy is the Noether charge,Phys

    R.M. Wald,Black hole entropy is the Noether charge,Phys. Rev. D48(1993) R3427 [gr-qc/9307038]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1993

  77. [77]

    Jacobson, G

    T. Jacobson, G. Kang and R.C. Myers,On black hole entropy,Phys. Rev. D49(1994) 6587 [gr-qc/9312023]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  78. [78]

    Sun,Note on Chern-Simons Term Correction to Holographic Entanglement Entropy, JHEP05(2009) 061 [0810.0967]

    J.-R. Sun,Note on Chern-Simons Term Correction to Holographic Entanglement Entropy, JHEP05(2009) 061 [0810.0967]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  79. [79]

    Hung, R.C

    L.-Y. Hung, R.C. Myers and M. Smolkin,On Holographic Entanglement Entropy and Higher Curvature Gravity,JHEP04(2011) 025 [1101.5813]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  80. [80]

    Jacobson and R.C

    T. Jacobson and R.C. Myers,Black hole entropy and higher curvature interactions,Phys. Rev. Lett.70(1993) 3684 [hep-th/9305016]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1993

Showing first 80 references.