Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 40 references

First Law of Entanglement Entropy in Flat-Space Holography

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The first law of entanglement entropy in flat-space holography is the integral of a one-form over a closed curve, and requiring its exterior derivative to vanish for generic perturbations of three-dimensional global Minkowski spacetime…

desk verdict A genuine first construction for FLEE in flat/BMSFT, but the inference from an integrated identity to local dχ=0 is not justified and the central claim does not hold as written. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.02560 v2 pith:C62ZL5TG submitted 2019-08-07 hep-th

Reza Fareghbal , Mehdi Hakami Shalamzari This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-th
keywords firstlawofentanglemententropyflat-spaceholographyBMSFTBMSsymmetrycosmologylinearizedEinsteinequationsholographicmodularHamiltonian
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper extends the 'gravity from entanglement' logic from anti-de Sitter holography to flat-space holography. In the flat/BMSFT correspondence, two-dimensional BMS-invariant field theories are dual to three-dimensional asymptotically flat spacetimes, and the entanglement entropy of an interval is the length of a bulk geodesic plus two null rays. The paper claims that, for perturbed BMSFT states dual to flat-space cosmology, the first law of entanglement entropy is exactly the statement that the integral of a particular one-form over a closed curve vanishes. Applying Stokes' theorem, the exterior derivative of this one-form is zero for flat-space cosmology and, for a generic metric obeying BMS boundary conditions, its vanishing forces the differential conditions that are the linearized Einstein equation for the perturbed metric. If the paper is right, the first law in the boundary theory is a holographic form of bulk gravitational dynamics in flat space, just as it is in AdS/CFT.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the one-form $\chi$ of equation (3.47), built from the bulk modular flow $\xi$ of global Minkowski, the perturbed metric $h_{\mu\nu}$, its trace, and the volume form. Its integral over the boundary interval reproduces the modular-Hamiltonian variation $\delta E_B$, while its integral over the bulk spacelike geodesic $\gamma$ and the null rays $\gamma_{\pm}$ reproduces the entanglement entropy variation $\delta S_B$. Because those curves join into a closed contour, FLEE takes the form $\int_\Pi d\chi = 0$, and the explicit exterior derivative of $\chi$ converts the boundary identity into local differential equations for $h_{uu}$ and $h_{u\varphi}$. The bulk modular flow $\xi$, inherited from the flat-space limit of the AdS modular Hamiltonian, supplies the geometric direction along which the charge is defined.

What would settle it

Choose a metric of the form (3.41) with arbitrary smooth functions $h_{uu}(u,\varphi)$ and $h_{u\varphi}(u,\varphi)$ for which $\partial_u h_{uu}$ is nonzero, and compute the closed-curve integral $\int_\Pi d\chi$ using (3.51)-(3.53) for every interval parameter $(l_\varphi, l_u, u_0, \varphi_0)$. If all such integrals vanish while $d\chi$ remains nonzero somewhere, then FLEE would hold for a metric that does not satisfy the local Einstein equations, and the paper's central inference would fail. The $r^2 \csc(l_\varphi/2)\, \partial_u h_{uu}$ term in (3.53) is the most direct place to look for such a counterexample.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that holographic FLEE in flat 3/BMSFT2 has a local bulk content. Writing both sides of FLEE in terms of metric perturbations $h_{uu}$ and $h_{u\varphi}$ of global Minkowski, the equality of $\delta S_B$ and $\delta E_B$ becomes the vanishing of the integral of a one-form $\chi$ over the closed curve formed by the boundary interval $B$ together with the bulk geodesic network $\gamma \cup \gamma_+ \cup \gamma_-$. Stokes' theorem turns this into $\int_\Pi d\chi = 0$. For constant perturbations, which describe flat-space cosmology, $d\chi = 0$ identically. For generic perturbations respecting BMS boundary conditions, the paper computes $d\chi$ explicitly and shows that $d\chi = 0$ implies $\partial_\varphi h_{uu} - 2\partial_u h_{u\varphi} = 0$ and $\partial_u h_{uu} = 0$, which are precisely the Einstein equations for the perturbed metric (3.41). The derivation is presented as the flat-space counterpart of the AdS/CFT result that FLEE yields linearized Einstein equations.

Load-bearing premise

The derivation stands on the step from equation (3.49) to equation (3.50): after showing that the integral of $d\chi$ over a surface bounded by the interval and the geodesics vanishes, the paper assumes the integrand itself vanishes; if that localization fails, FLEE may fix only integrated combinations of the metric perturbation rather than the local conditions that reproduce Einstein's equations.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Holographic FLEE holds for flat-space cosmology without any further constraint: the perturbed metric is automatically a solution of Einstein's equations, so the one-form is closed.
  • For a generic BMS-boundary-condition perturbation, imposing FLEE for all intervals forces the metric to satisfy the linearized Einstein equations; the first law is a bulk equation of motion, not merely a boundary identity.
  • The calculation provides a dictionary expressing the BMSFT stress-tensor expectation value $\delta\langle T^w_{\varphi}\rangle$ in terms of the bulk perturbations $h_{uu}$ and $h_{u\varphi}$, linking flat-holography charges to metric data.
  • The closed-curve construction gives a flat-space analogue of the standard holographic entanglement-entropy derivation, showing that the entanglement-first-law route to gravity is not special to a negative cosmological constant.
  • The same Stokes' theorem argument identifies $d\chi$ as the object whose vanishing is the flat-space Einstein equation, so future constructions of bulk geometry from boundary entanglement can target $d\chi$ directly.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The unproven localization step from $\int_\Pi d\chi = 0$ to $d\chi = 0$ is the point to stress-test: if only the integrated condition follows from FLEE, the first law could fix interval-averaged metric data without fixing local Einstein equations.
  • A natural extension would be to repeat the construction for BMSFT3 in four-dimensional flat space, where the infinite-dimensional BMS4 symmetry may determine the corresponding one-form and yield linearized gravity in four dimensions.
  • The surface $\Sigma$ used to define conserved charges is fixed by replacing the AdS radius with Newton's constant in the boundary metric; if a more canonical prescription were found, the $\delta E_B$ side of the equality could change, and the match with Einstein equations would be a nontrivial test of that prescription.
  • The paper's computation is linear in $h_{\mu\nu}$; testing whether non-linear corrections preserve the closure of $\chi$ would indicate whether the first law encodes the full Einstein equation or only its linearization.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper claims to provide a holographic derivation of the first law of entanglement entropy (FLEE) in the flat/BMSFT correspondence for three-dimensional asymptotically flat spacetimes. The authors construct a one-form χ on the bulk side such that, for a BMSFT interval B and the associated bulk extremal curves γ, γ+ and γ−, the entropy variation δS and the modular energy variation δE are both given by integrals of χ. FLEE then becomes an integral statement over a closed curve, which is converted via Stokes' theorem into ∫_Π dχ = 0 for any surface Π bounded by that curve. The paper states that this implies dχ = 0, and for a perturbation of global Minkowski spacetime with only huu and huφ nonzero this leads to the conditions ∂φhuu = 2∂uhuφ and ∂uhuu = 0, which are the relevant linearized Einstein equations for that restricted ansatz. The conclusion is that FLEE for flat-space holography is equivalent to the bulk Einstein equations.

Significance. If the central claim were established, this would be a meaningful extension of the 'gravitation from entanglement' program from AdS/CFT to flat-space holography, showing that the first law of entanglement entropy in a BMSFT selects the linearized Einstein equations for asymptotically flat bulk geometries. The paper contains useful explicit material: the modular flow, the geodesic construction from flat holography, and the explicit one-form χ in Eq. (3.47). These are valuable elements for further work. However, the logical step that converts the integral identity into pointwise equations is not justified, and the computation is restricted to a non-generic metric ansatz despite the abstract's claim of genericity. The result is therefore not established in the form stated.

major comments (4)
  1. [§3.3, Eqs. (3.49)–(3.50)] The inference from (3.49) to (3.50) is invalid. For fixed interval parameters (lu, lφ, u0, φ0), every surface Π appearing in (3.49) has the same boundary C = B ∪ γ− ∪ γ ∪ γ+. By Stokes' theorem, ∫_Π dχ = ∮_C χ, so (3.49) is simply a restatement of the FLEE identity (3.48) and contains no local information; the fact that Π can be chosen arbitrarily among surfaces spanning the same boundary cannot force the pointwise vanishing of dχ. To obtain dχ = 0 one would need to vary the interval parameters and invert the resulting integral equations, as is done in the AdS/CFT case reviewed in Section 2 via varying R and the ball center. No such argument is provided, yet equations (3.54) are read off from dχ = 0. This is the load-bearing step of the paper and currently invalid.
  2. [Abstract and §3.3, Eq. (3.41)] The abstract and conclusion state that FLEE yields the Einstein equation for a generic perturbation of three-dimensional global Minkowski spacetime, but the actual computation in Section 3.3 is restricted to the ansatz (3.41) with only huu and huφ nonvanishing. The authors acknowledge that this is not the generic BMS boundary condition and assert that the argument 'can be generalized to more generic cases' without carrying out the generalization. Consequently, even if dχ = 0 were established, the derived conditions (3.54) would only hold for the restricted class, not for a generic perturbation as claimed.
  3. [§3.3, Eq. (3.51)] The expression for dχ in (3.51) lists only two of the three independent components of a 2-form in three dimensions; the dr ∧ dφ component is omitted. Since the conclusion (3.54) is drawn from dχ = 0, the paper must either show that this missing component vanishes identically for the ansatz (3.41) or include it in the equations. As written, the derivation from dχ = 0 to (3.54) is incomplete.
  4. [§3.3, Eq. (3.46)] The identification of the one-form χ such that δE = ∫_B χ and δS = ∫_{γ−∪γ∪γ+} χ is asserted rather than demonstrated. This identification is the bridge that converts the two separate expressions (3.42) and (3.45) into the single Stokes' theorem statement (3.49), so the paper should provide the explicit computation showing that the integrals of (3.47) over the specified curves reproduce those expressions.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Throughout] There are numerous typographical errors, including 'descried' in the abstract, 'the write hand side' after Eq. (3.40), 'convinient' before Eq. (3.38), and 'undermined components' in the conclusion; a careful proofread is needed.
  2. [§3.2, Eq. (3.31)] In Eq. (3.31), the symbol ℓφ is used for the interval length, but the interval is elsewhere denoted lφ; please unify the notation.
  3. [§3.3, Eq. (3.44)] The notation in (3.44) reuses φ for the center of the interval after φ was an integration variable in (3.43); the expression cosφ should be written as a function of the center coordinate (e.g., φ0) to avoid confusion.
  4. [§3.3, Eq. (3.42)] The use of the flat-space cosmology entropy formula (3.31) for the global Minkowski background, for which m = −1 and βφ is imaginary, deserves an explanatory comment; the paper should state the analytic continuation or limiting procedure used.
  5. [Note added] The note added mentions overlap with arXiv:1908.02044 but does not describe the precise relation to that work; a brief discussion of how the present derivation differs would be helpful.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The local Einstein-equation claim is not fully derived: it rests on an unproven localization from ∫dχ=0 to dχ=0 and on a self-cited definition of the boundary surface Σ; no data fitting or renaming is involved.

  1. other [Sec. 3.3, between Eqs. (3.49) and (3.54)]
    "Since Π is any bounded surface, from (3.49) one may expect that dχ = 0."

    All the local equations (3.54) are read off from dχ=0. But the preceding equation (3.49) is only ∫Π dχ=0 for surfaces with the fixed boundary B∪γ+∪γ−∪γ. For a fixed closed curve, Stokes' theorem makes that integral the same for every spanning surface, so it does not imply vanishing of the 2-form dχ, nor do the authors invert an integral transform over the family of intervals. Thus the step from the FLEE identity to the local Einstein equations is not derived; it is assumed. The claimed prediction is therefore equivalent to the assumption dχ=0, which is precisely the content used to produce (3.54).

  2. self citation load bearing [Sec. 3.3, text after Eq. (3.37); summary in Sec. 4]
    "Our proposal is that this surface for the flat spacetimes is the same as that one for the asymptotically AdS case whose flat-space limit yields the asymptotically flat spacetimes [30]. This proposal works again in this problem similar to all previous works [33]-[38], however, a thorough investigation is necessary that we hope to do in our future studies."

    The computation of δE, and hence the holographic form of FLEE, depends on the spatial surface Σ used in the conserved-charge integral (3.33). The paper imports this definition from the authors' own earlier work [30] and explicitly labels it a proposal needing further investigation. No independent derivation or external check is supplied for this load-bearing dictionary entry, so the central claim is conditional on a self-cited ansatz. This is not a fitted parameter, but it is a load-bearing self-citation rather than an independently established result.

full rationale

The paper does not fit parameters to data and does not rename a known empirical pattern. Its main machinery is a rewriting of FLEE: once the one-form χ is chosen so that its boundary and geodesic integrals reproduce δE and δS, equations (3.48)-(3.49) are the first law itself, not an independent bulk prediction. The independent content is the explicit computation of dχ and the algebraic consequence (3.54) when dχ is set to zero. That computation is not circular. The circularity-type problems are located elsewhere: the localization step (3.49)→(3.50) is unproven and, as written, supplies dχ=0 by assumption, making the local Einstein equations depend on the very statement being derived; and the definition of the boundary surface Σ comes from a self-cited proposal that the authors themselves describe as needing thorough investigation. These issues make the derivation partially assumption-driven, but the explicit χ/dχ algebra retains independent content, so the overall circularity score is moderate rather than high.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No constants are fitted to data or chosen by hand to enforce the result; the inputs are the interval lφ, lu, background metrics, and small perturbations huu and huφ. Pure geometric and theory parameters such as G are carried from the prior literature. The axioms listed are the main unproved inputs the central claim rests on, with the localization step being the most fragile. The paper introduces no new particles, forces, dimensions, or conserved quantities; the one-form χ and modular flow ξ are mathematical objects adapted from prior work.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Flat/BMSFT correspondence: asymptotically flat (d+1)-dimensional spacetimes are dual to d-dimensional BMS-invariant field theories.
    Used throughout Section 3.1; the duality is the framework of the paper and is not proven here.
  • domain assumption Holographic entanglement entropy proposal of Jiang-Song-Wen: BMSFT entanglement entropy equals Length(γ∪γ+∪γ−)/4G for the specified bulk curves.
    Invoked in Section 3.2, Eq. (3.11); this is the flat-space analogue of Ryu-Takayanagi and is taken from ref. [12].
  • domain assumption Boundary surface Σ for conserved charges is defined by ds²_CB = -du² + G²dφ², obtained by replacing the AdS radius ℓ with Newton constant G in the conformal boundary metric.
    Introduced in Section 3.3 around Eq. (3.37), based on ref. [30]; the authors note a thorough investigation is still necessary.
  • domain assumption The modular Hamiltonian HB equals the conserved charge of the modular flow ξ up to an additive constant that drops out of variations.
    Used before Eq. (3.33); standard in the entanglement-first-law literature but not re-derived here.
  • ad hoc to paper Localization: equality of the closed-curve integrals in (3.49) for all intervals implies the pointwise condition dχ=0 in (3.50).
    The paper states this as 'one may expect' rather than proving it; this is a load-bearing step connecting integrated FLEE to local Einstein equations.
  • domain assumption BMS boundary conditions restrict the perturbed bulk metric to the form ds²=(-1+huu)du² -2dudr +2huφ dudφ +r²dφ², with fixed components.
    Stated after Eq. (3.41), citing [24]; the paper notes components were fixed for simplicity and says the argument can be generalized.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of First Law of Entanglement Entropy in Flat-Space Holography." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/C62ZL5TG

@misc{pith2026190802560,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: First Law of Entanglement Entropy in Flat-Space Holography},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/C62ZL5TG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.02560}
}
abstract

According to flat/Bondi-Metzner-Sachs invariant field theories (BMSFT) correspondence, asymptotically flat spacetimes in $(d+1)$-dimensions are dual to $d$-dimensional BMSFTs. In this duality, similar to the Ryu-Takayanagi proposal in the AdS/CFT correspondence, the entanglement entropy of subsystems in the field theory side is given by the area of some particular surfaces in the gravity side. In this paper we find the holographic counterpart of the first law of entanglement entropy (FLEE) in a two-dimensional BMSFT. We show that FLEE for the BMSFT perturbed states which are descried by three-dimensional flat-space cosmology, corresponds to the integral of a particular one-form on a closed curve. This curve consists of BMSFT interval and also null and spacelike geodesics in the bulk gravitational theory. Exterior derivative of this form is zero when it is calculated for the flat-space cosmology. However, for a generic perturbation of three-dimensional global Minkowski spacetime, the exterior derivative of one-form yields Einstein equation. This is the first step for constructing bulk geometry by using FLEE in the flat/BMSFT correspondence.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Correspondence between Asymptotically Fla t Spacetimes and Nonrelativistic Conformal Field Theories,

    A. Bagchi, “Correspondence between Asymptotically Fla t Spacetimes and Nonrelativistic Conformal Field Theories,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 171601 (2010). A. Bagchi, “The BMS/GCA correspondence,” arXiv:1006.3354 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2010

  2. [2]

    BMS/GCA Redux: Towards Flat space Holography from Non- Relativistic Symmetries,

    A. Bagchi and R. Fareghbal, “BMS/GCA Redux: Towards Flat space Holography from Non- Relativistic Symmetries,” [arXiv:1203.5795 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  3. [3]

    Bondi, M

    H. Bondi, M. G. van der Burg, and A. W. Metzner, “Gravitati onal waves in general relativity

    work page

  4. [4]

    Asymptotic stru cture of symmetry reduced general relativity,

    A. Ashtekar, J. Bicak and B. G. Schmidt, “Asymptotic stru cture of symmetry reduced general relativity,” Phys. Rev. D 55, 669 (1997) [gr-qc/9608042]

    arXiv 1997

  5. [5]

    Classical central extension for asymptotic symmetries at null infinity in three spacetime dimensions,

    G. Barnich and G. Compere, “Classical central extension for asymptotic symmetries at null infinity in three spacetime dimensions,” Class. Quant. Grav . 24, F15 (2007) [gr-qc/0610130]

    arXiv 2007

  6. [6]

    Symmetries of asymptotic ally flat 4 dimensional spacetimes at null infinity revisited,

    G. Barnich and C. Troessaert, “Symmetries of asymptotic ally flat 4 dimensional spacetimes at null infinity revisited,” arXiv:0909.2617 [gr-qc]

    arXiv

  7. [7]

    Gravitational waves in general relativity. 8. Waves in asymptotically flat space- times,

    Waves from axisymmetric isolated systems,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 269 (1962) 21. R. K. Sachs, “Gravitational waves in general relativity. 8. Waves in asymptotically flat space- times,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 270 (1962) 103. R. K. Sachs, “Asymptotic symmetries in gravitational theor y,” Phys. Rev. 128 (1962) 2851

    work page 1962

  8. [8]

    Aspects of the BMS/CFT cor respondence,

    G. Barnich and C. Troessaert, “Aspects of the BMS/CFT cor respondence,” JHEP 1005, 062 (2010) [arXiv:1001.1541 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2010

Show all 40 references
  1. [9]

    Entangl ement entropy in Galilean con- formal field theories and flat holography,

    A. Bagchi, R. Basu, D. Grumiller and M. Riegler, “Entangl ement entropy in Galilean con- formal field theories and flat holography,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, no. 11, 111602 (2015) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.111602 [arXiv:1410.4089 [ hep-th]]

    2015 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Gravitational anomal ies, entanglement entropy, and flat- space holography,

    S. M. Hosseini and . Vliz-Osorio, “Gravitational anomal ies, entanglement entropy, and flat- space holography,” Phys. Rev. D 93, no. 4, 046005 (2016) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.046005 [arXiv:1507.06625 [hep-th]]

    2016 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Entanglement and mut ual information in two-dimensional nonrelativistic field theories,

    S. M. Hosseini and . Vliz-Osorio, “Entanglement and mut ual information in two-dimensional nonrelativistic field theories,” Phys. Rev. D 93, no. 2, 026010 (2016) [Phys. Rev. D 93, 026010 (2016)] doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.026010 [arXiv:1 510.03876 [hep-th]]. 17

    2016 doi

  4. [12]

    Wilson Lines and Holographic En tanglement Entropy in Galilean Conformal Field Theories,

    R. Basu and M. Riegler, “Wilson Lines and Holographic En tanglement Entropy in Galilean Conformal Field Theories,” Phys. Rev. D 93, no. 4, 045003 (2016) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.045003 [arXiv:1511.08662 [hep -th]]

    2016 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Entanglement Entropy in Fl at Holography,

    H. Jiang, W. Song and Q. Wen, “Entanglement Entropy in Fl at Holography,” JHEP 1707, 142 (2017) doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2017)142 [arXiv:1706.075 52 [hep-th]]

    2017 doi

  6. [14]

    Logarithmic Correction to BMSFT Entanglement Entropy,

    R. Fareghbal and P. Karimi, “Logarithmic Correction to BMSFT Entanglement Entropy,” Eur. Phys. J. C 78, no. 3, 267 (2018) doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-5760-x [a rXiv:1709.01804 [hep-th]]

    2018 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Holographic entanglement a nd Poincar blocks in three-dimensional flat space,

    E. Hijano and C. Rabideau, “Holographic entanglement a nd Poincar blocks in three-dimensional flat space,” JHEP 1805, 068 (2018) doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2018)068 [arXiv:1712.07131 [hep-th]]

    2018 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Holographic Calculation of BMSFT Mutual and 3-partite Information,

    M. Asadi and R. Fareghbal, “Holographic Calculation of BMSFT Mutual and 3-partite Information,” Eur. Phys. J. C 78, no. 8, 620 (2018) doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-6098-0 [arXiv:1802.06618 [hep-th]]

    2018 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Holographic derivation of en tanglement entropy from AdS/CFT,

    S. Ryu and T. Takayanagi, “Holographic derivation of en tanglement entropy from AdS/CFT,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 181602 (2006) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.181602 [hep- th/0603001]

    2006

  10. [18]

    A Covaria nt holographic entan- glement entropy proposal,

    V. E. Hubeny, M. Rangamani and T. Takayanagi, “A Covaria nt holographic entan- glement entropy proposal,” JHEP 0707, 062 (2007) doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2007/07/062 [arXiv:0705.0016 [hep-th]]

    2007 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Grav itational dynamics from entanglement ’thermodynamics’,

    N. Lashkari, M. B. McDermott and M. Van Raamsdonk, “Grav itational dynamics from entanglement ’thermodynamics’,” JHEP 1404, 195 (2014) doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2014)195 [arXiv:1308.3716 [hep-th]]

    2014 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Gravitation from Entanglement in Holographic CFTs,

    T. Faulkner, M. Guica, T. Hartman, R. C. Myers and M. Van R aamsdonk, “Gravitation from Entanglement in Holographic CFTs,” JHEP 1403, 051 (2014) doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2014)051 [arXiv:1312.7856 [hep-th]]

    2014 arXiv

  13. [21]

    A New cosmological scenari o in string theory,

    L. Cornalba and M. S. Costa, “A New cosmological scenari o in string theory,” Phys. Rev. D 66, 066001 (2002) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.66.066001 [hep-th/ 0203031]

    2002 doi

  14. [22]

    Time dependent orbifolds a nd string cosmology,

    L. Cornalba and M. S. Costa, “Time dependent orbifolds a nd string cosmology,” Fortsch. Phys. 52, 145 (2004) doi:10.1002/prop.200310123 [hep-th/0310099 ]. 18

    2004 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Holo graphy of 3D Flat Cosmological Horizons,

    A. Bagchi, S. Detournay, R. Fareghbal and J. Simn, “Holo graphy of 3D Flat Cosmological Horizons,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, no. 14, 141302 (2013) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.1413 02 [arXiv:1208.4372 [hep-th]]

    2013 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Entropy of three-dimensional asymptotic ally flat cosmological solutions,

    G. Barnich, “Entropy of three-dimensional asymptotic ally flat cosmological solutions,” JHEP 1210, 095 (2012) doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2012)095 [arXiv:1208.43 71 [hep-th]]

    2012 doi

  17. [25]

    Conformal symmetries of gravity from as ymptotic methods: further devel- opments,

    P. H. Lambert, “Conformal symmetries of gravity from as ymptotic methods: further devel- opments,” arXiv:1409.4693 [gr-qc]

    arXiv

  18. [26]

    Local quantum e nergy conditions in non-Lorentz- invariant quantum field theories,

    D. Grumiller, P. Parekh and M. Riegler, “Local quantum e nergy conditions in non-Lorentz- invariant quantum field theories,” arXiv:1907.06650 [hep- th]

    1907 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Towards a derivati on of holographic entanglement entropy,

    H. Casini, M. Huerta and R. C. Myers, “Towards a derivati on of holographic entanglement entropy,” JHEP 1105, 036 (2011) doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2011)036 [arXiv:1102.04 40 [hep-th]]

    2011 doi

  20. [28]

    A Review of the Holographic Relation betw een Linearized Gravity and the First Law of Entanglement Entropy,

    R. Jaksland, “A Review of the Holographic Relation betw een Linearized Gravity and the First Law of Entanglement Entropy,” arXiv:1711.10854 [hep -th]

    arXiv

  21. [29]

    R. M. Wald, General Relativity, Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1984

    1984

  22. [30]

    The Flat lim it of three dimen- sional asymptotically anti-de Sitter spacetimes,

    G. Barnich, A. Gomberoff and H. A. Gonzalez, “The Flat lim it of three dimen- sional asymptotically anti-de Sitter spacetimes,” Phys. R ev. D 86, 024020 (2012) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86.024020 [arXiv:1204.3288 [gr-q c]]

    2012 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Flat-Space Energy-Momentu m Tensor from BMS/GCA Corre- spondence,

    R. Fareghbal and A. Naseh, “Flat-Space Energy-Momentu m Tensor from BMS/GCA Corre- spondence,” JHEP 1403, 005 (2014) doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2014)005 [arXiv:1312.21 09 [hep- th]]

    2014 doi

  24. [32]

    Towards the generalized gravitational entrop y for spacetimes with non-Lorentz invariant duals,

    Q. Wen, “Towards the generalized gravitational entrop y for spacetimes with non-Lorentz invariant duals,” JHEP 1901, 220 (2019) doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2019)220 [arXiv:1810.11 756 [hep-th]]

    2019 doi

  25. [33]

    Quasilocal energy and co nserved charges derived from the gravitational action,

    J. D. Brown and J. W. York, Jr., “Quasilocal energy and co nserved charges derived from the gravitational action,” Phys. Rev. D 47, 1407 (1993) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.47.1407 [gr- qc/9209012]

    1993

  26. [34]

    Rindler/Contracted-CFT Co rrespondence,

    R. Fareghbal and A. Naseh, “Rindler/Contracted-CFT Co rrespondence,” JHEP 1406, 134 (2014) doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2014)134 [arXiv:1404.3937 [h ep-th]]

    2014 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Holography of 3D Asymp totically Flat Black Holes,

    R. Fareghbal and S. M. Hosseini, “Holography of 3D Asymp totically Flat Black Holes,” Phys. Rev. D 91, no. 8, 084025 (2015) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.084025 [ar Xiv:1412.2569 [hep-th]]. 19

    2015 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Aspects of Ultra -Relativistic Field Theories via Flat-space Holography,

    R. Fareghbal, A. Naseh and S. Rouhani, “Aspects of Ultra -Relativistic Field Theories via Flat-space Holography,” Phys. Lett. B 771, 189 (2017) doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2017.04.040 [arXiv:1511.01774 [hep-th]]

    2017 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Flat-Spa ce Holography and Stress Ten- sor of Kerr Black Hole,

    O. Baghchesaraei, R. Fareghbal and Y. Izadi, “Flat-Spa ce Holography and Stress Ten- sor of Kerr Black Hole,” Phys. Lett. B 760, 713 (2016) doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2016.07.062 [arXiv:1603.04137 [hep-th]]

    2016 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Stress te nsor correlators of CCFT 2 using flat-space holography,

    M. Asadi, O. Baghchesaraei and R. Fareghbal, “Stress te nsor correlators of CCFT 2 using flat-space holography,” Eur. Phys. J. C 77, no. 11, 737 (2017) doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-017- 5333-4 [arXiv:1701.00063 [hep-th]]

    2017 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Flat-space Holography and Correlators of Robinson- Trautman Stress tensor,

    R. Fareghbal and I. Mohammadi, “Flat-space Holography and Correlators of Robinson- Trautman Stress tensor,” arXiv:1802.05445 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  32. [40]

    Gravitation in flat spacetime f rom entanglement,

    V. Godet and C. Marteau, “Gravitation in flat spacetime f rom entanglement,” arXiv:1908.02044 [hep-th]. 20

    1908 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.