Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Universal Constraints for Conformal Line Defects

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Conformal line defects obey a new infinite set of integrated bootstrap constraints beyond SL(2,R) crossing.

desk verdict New integrated constraints for line defects that pass several checks, but the universality claim is undercut by unproven exclusions in Appendix A.2 in d=3,4. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.06900 v2 pith:F6V4WWV6 submitted 2025-01-12 hep-th

Barak Gabai , Amit Sever , De-liang Zhong This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-th MSC 81T40 PACS 11.25.Hf
keywords conformallinedefectsdisplacementoperatorbootstrapintegratedconstraintsdefectCFTOPEsumrulesWilsonlinesepsilonexpansion
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

Conformal field theories contain one-dimensional extended operators, line defects, whose correlation functions must be invariant under arbitrary smooth deformations of the line. This paper argues that this invariance, expanded around a straight line, produces a new infinite tower of integral constraints on four-point functions involving the displacement operator. The constraints are claimed to be universal, holding in any defect CFT that satisfies two mild spectral assumptions, and they go beyond the constraints that follow from SL(2,R) invariance and crossing along a straight line. The paper verifies the constraints against existing weak-, strong-, and finite-coupling data in several theories and uses them to predict new OPE coefficients in the O(N) Wilson-Fisher magnetic line defect.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the subtracted four-point function $F = \hat{F} - F_{\mathrm{GFF}}$, built from the displacement operator $D$ (dimension two, transverse spin one) and a defect primary $O$ of dimension $\Delta_O$, with cross-ratio $t = x_{12}x_{34}/(x_{14}x_{23})$. The mechanism is a two-way computation of the second-order variation of a two-point function $\langle O O\rangle$ under an arbitrary smooth deformation $v(\tau)$ of the straight line: conformal covariance gives a source term from dilatation and transverse rotation, while the operator expansion gives integrated insertions of displacement operators; a Mellin transform turns the integrals into algebraic constraints on $F$. Because an infinitesimal conformal deformation is a quadratic polynomial, only three Mellin moments of $v$ contribute, which yields exactly the homogeneous and inhomogeneous identities.

What would settle it

Compute the displacement four-point function in one specific defect CFT at the first order where an unprotected operator contributes, for example the O(N) Wilson-Fisher magnetic line at O($epsilon^{2}$) from direct Feynman diagrams, substitute it into the homogeneous constraint (9) with the displacement kernel $\int_0^1 dt\,(1+t+t^2)F^{DDDD}_{1111}(t)=0$, and check that the result vanishes after the paper's prescribed analytic continuation; a nonzero finite value would falsify the universal claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the subtracted four-point functions $F = \hat{F} - F_{\mathrm{GFF}}$ of the displacement operator, and of a displacement pair with another defect primary $O$, obey the homogeneous identities (9) and the inhomogeneous identities (11), (12), for example $\int_0^\infty dt\,[t^2(F^{\mathrm{ODDO}}_{JijI}+F^{\mathrm{DODO}}_{iIjJ})+(1+t)^2 F^{\mathrm{ODDO}}_{JjiI}]=0$. These identities follow from computing the conformal transformation of a slightly deformed line in two ways: once from conformal covariance of the shape functional, and once by expanding the deformed line as integrals of displacement operators on the straight line. Matching the two at second order in the deformation, after a Mellin transform, eliminates the arbitrary deformation profile and leaves the integral constraints. Under the stated assumptions the constraints hold for every conformal line defect and can be recast as OPE sum rules of the form (13).

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that the defect spectrum contains no non-trivial primary operator of dimension $\Delta_O+1-m$ (for non-negative integer $m$) with the same charges as $O$ and transverse spin differing by one unit; if such an operator exists, mixing at second order in the deformation modifies the constraints.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any conformal line defect satisfying the two assumptions has its displacement four-point functions subject to the integral constraints, so proposed spectra can be tested by evaluating the kernels in (9), (11), and (12).
  • The constraints convert into universal OPE sum rules (13), giving linear relations among squared OPE coefficients and operator dimensions that do not depend on the specific theory.
  • Existing displacement four-point data for the N=4 SYM Wilson line, ABJM theory, AdS3 x S3 x T4 defects, and the O(N) magnetic line all satisfy the constraints; the O(N) case yields new O(epsilon^2) predictions, including C^(2)_{DD phi1} = -pi(29N^2+413N+1610)/(12(N+8)^{5/2}).
  • The derivation extends to higher-order variations of the line, and the authors argue that even-dimensional curved defects introduce an extra source term from the gravitational anomaly.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: because the homogeneous constraints contain no theory-dependent source, a violation of (9) in any candidate defect CFT would signal either missing mixing operators of the excluded type or an error in the correlator; the constraints can therefore serve as sharp consistency checks in numerical bootstrap studies.
  • Editorial inference: the second assumption is spectral and may fail in theories with degenerate multiplets; in such cases the mixing terms could be included systematically, turning the constraints into equations that solve for the mixing coefficients rather than simply testing them.
  • Editorial inference: the analogy with soft theorems suggests the constraints should hold non-perturbatively, order by order after the prescribed analytic continuation in operator dimensions; testing them at the next available order in N=4 SYM, beyond two loops, would be a natural target.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper derives a new infinite set of integrated constraints for four-point functions on conformal line defects from the non-linearly realized ambient-space conformal symmetry. The constraints are stated in (9), (11), and (12) as homogeneous and inhomogeneous integral identities for subtracted four-point functions. The authors check them against known data for the 1/2-BPS Wilson line in N=4 SYM and ABJM, the O(N) Wilson-Fisher magnetic line defect, and the AdS3 x S3 x T4 mixed-flux defect, and they extract new predictions, including two OPE coefficients in the O(N) model and a relation among bootstrap parameters in the AdS3 case. The derivation is based on expanding a deformed line around the straight line and requiring consistency between two ways of computing the conformal transformation of the defect with insertions.

Significance. If the constraints are valid, they constitute a genuinely new tool for defect CFT: they go beyond SL(2,R) crossing on the straight line and can be converted into OPE sum rules of the form (13). The paper is honest about its assumptions, explicitly lists them in Section III, and provides concrete checks at weak, strong, and finite coupling. The new predictions (26), (27), and the fixing of (E3) are falsifiable and would be valuable even if the universality claim is later restricted. The main weakness is that several load-bearing steps in the derivation are asserted rather than proved, and those steps are exactly what is needed to establish universality in d=2,3,4.

major comments (4)
  1. [Appendix A.2, Eqs. (A16)-(A18)] The single-integral decomposition (A3) is incomplete in low spacetime dimensions, and the exclusions needed to obtain the constraints are not proved. The d=4 term (A16) is stated to be 'ruled out by our bootstrap' without the promised analysis; the d=3 term (A17) is explicitly said to be 'expected, but did not prove' to vanish and is then assumed zero; and the d=2 case is dismissed with 'we have repeated the derivation' and no details. These terms contribute at O(v_a v_c) and O(v_c^2) to the equations that yield (9), (11), and (12), and the authors acknowledge that (A17) would shift the spin source [Mij]IJ in (11)-(12). Since the checks in Section IV include N=4 SYM in d=4, ABJM in d=3, and the AdS3/CFT2 defect in d=2, the constraints are not established as universal in exactly the dimensions where the paper tests them. The authors should either provide the missing bootstrap analysis or explicitly restrict the universality claim.
  2. [Section III vs. Appendix A.2] The assumptions stated in the main text are weaker than the 'generic' assumption used in the derivation. Section III assumes only that there is no scalar primary singlet of dimension 3, whereas Appendix A.2 assumes that the only scalar singlet with integer dimension Δ<4 is the identity. The single-integral enumeration that leads to the constraints relies on the stronger, appendix-level assumption. As a result, the constraints are not derived under the hypotheses announced in Section III, and the paper should either prove the constraints under the stated assumptions or list the stronger conditions as additional assumptions.
  3. [Section III, second assumption] The second explicit assumption—absence of a non-trivial primary defect operator of dimension Δ_O+1−m with the same charges as O and transverse spin differing by one unit—is a spectral condition on the full DCFT that cannot be verified generically. The paper checks it only in the examples considered, and it is not a consequence of conformal symmetry alone. Because this assumption is needed to justify the transformation property (A1)-(A2), the 'universal' nature of the constraints is conditional on an unproven spectral gap. The authors should either supply evidence that such operators are generically absent (for instance, from unitarity or representation theory) or present the constraints as valid for the class of DCFTs satisfying this gap.
  4. [Section IV.A and Appendix C] The new predictions (26) and (27) are obtained by substituting perturbative data into the constraints and using the enhancement mechanism. Since the inhomogeneous constraint (11) is one of the equations that could be modified by the unproven terms (A16)-(A17), the numerical predictions inherit the same caveat. If the coefficient of (A17) is not zero in d=3, the right-hand side of (11) shifts, and (26) would change. The paper should state clearly that the predictions are valid only within the same assumptions under which the constraints are derived.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section III, first bullet] The phrase 'The is no scalar primary defect operator' contains a typo and should read 'There is no scalar primary defect operator.'
  2. [Appendix E] The word 'homophonous constraints' should read 'homogeneous constraints.'
  3. [References [54] and [55]] The entries 'Work in progress' and 'To appear' are incomplete; please update them with arXiv numbers or full author lists if available.
  4. [Equation (19)] The subscript (1) is used to indicate the order in ε but is not defined at first use; please define it explicitly.
  5. [Footnote 4] The prescription for subtracting fractional power divergences is stated too briefly; please give the analytic-continuation prescription or a reference.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity; the integral constraints are derived from conformal covariance and are checked against independent data.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation starts from the conformal transformation of a smoothly deformed line defect and expands it around a straight line. The constraints (9), (11), (12) are obtained by equating two descriptions of the second-order variation, with no target correlator inserted as an input. The subtracted correlator F = bF - FGFF is defined by subtracting the standard generalized free-field contribution, not by imposing the constraints. The O(N) prediction for C^(2)_DDphi1 is solved from a constraint equation after substituting perturbative data from [19,20]; it is not a refitting of the same quantity. The AdS3 relation (E3) is recovered from the constraints without using the holographic computation, so it is a genuine independent check. The cited transformation properties from [10] are adapted and re-derived in Appendix A, and although they are a self-citation, they do not smuggle in the target result. The main stated limitations are in Appendix A.2: in d=3 and d=4 certain single-integration terms are allowed by straight-line symmetries and are assumed or asserted to vanish, with the d=3 term explicitly 'expected, but did not prove, that it would be fixed to zero.' These are conditional spectral assumptions, not circular definitions or fitted predictions. They affect the universality claim but do not make the derivation equivalent to its inputs. External checks against N=4 SYM, ABJM, and AdS3 data further show that the constraints have independent content.

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

No new particles, forces, dimensions, or conserved quantities are introduced. The displacement operator D is the standard operator controlling smooth deformations in existing defect CFT literature. The derivation depends on the two explicit spectrum assumptions in Section III and on the unproven 3d coefficient assumption, as listed.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption There is no scalar primary defect operator that is a singlet under internal symmetries and has dimension 3.
    Assumption 1 in Section III. Needed so that at second order in the shape deformation the varied two-point function receives only two integrated displacement insertions; a dimension-3 singlet would generate extra single-integration terms.
  • domain assumption There is no non-trivial primary defect operator of dimension Δ_O+1-m (m a non-negative integer), with the same charges as O and transverse spin differing by one unit.
    Assumption 2 in Section III. Needed for the defect operator O to transform under second-order deformation by only a conformal factor and a spin factor; otherwise operator mixing adds terms to the constraints.
  • ad hoc to paper In three spacetime dimensions the coefficient of the parity-violating single-integral term ∫ ε_ij v_i v'_j <OO> is zero.
    Stated after Eq. (A17): 'We expected, but did not prove, that it would be fixed to zero. In what follows we assume that this is indeed the case.' This assumption is needed so the inhomogeneous constraints are unmodified in d=3.
  • domain assumption In generic CFTs, the only scalar operator that is a singlet under all internal symmetries and has integer dimension Δ<4 is the identity, and there is no operator of dimension Δ_O+1 with the same charges as O and spin larger by one unit.
    Assumed in Appendix A, subsection 2, to classify single-integration terms as total derivatives. It is a weaker or related version of the two main assumptions in the main text.
  • domain assumption Conformal line operators exhibit no conformal anomaly and can be placed on arbitrary smooth paths.
    Introductory premise; the whole shape-deformation expansion relies on this. It is standard for line defects but nontrivial.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Universal Constraints for Conformal Line Defects." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/F6V4WWV6

@misc{pith2026250106900,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Universal Constraints for Conformal Line Defects},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/F6V4WWV6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.06900}
}
read the original abstract

We present a novel framework for deriving integral constraints for correlators on conformal line defects. These constraints emerge from the non-linearly realized ambient-space conformal symmetry. To validate our approach, we examine several examples and compare them against existing data for the four-point function of the displacement operator. Additionally, we provide a few new predictions that extend the current understanding of these correlators.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. dS/CFT Correspondence from a Defect Operator

    hep-th 2025-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A PT-defect-twisted inner product reproduces the de Sitter scalar two-point function, and PT symmetry is necessarily broken in CFT_2 with an imaginary central charge.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

79 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Collecting all the contributions, we find that the two independent homogeneous constraints in (9) are satisfied. b. The inhomogeneous constraint For I = J, the second inhomogeneous equation in (12) becomes trivial, so we only have to check the first. The source on the right-hand side of this equation is of order O(ε0), see (18). On the left-hand side, the...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Rychkov, EPFL Lectures on Conformal Field Theory in D ≥ 3 Dimensions, SpringerBriefs in Physics (2016) arXiv:1601.05000 [hep-th]

    S. Rychkov, EPFL Lectures on Conformal Field Theory in D ≥ 3 Dimensions, SpringerBriefs in Physics (2016) arXiv:1601.05000 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2016

  3. [3]

    Simmons-Duffin, The Conformal Bootstrap, in Theo- retical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics: New Frontiers in Fields and Strings(2017) pp

    D. Simmons-Duffin, The Conformal Bootstrap, in Theo- retical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics: New Frontiers in Fields and Strings(2017) pp. 1–74, arXiv:1602.07982 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2017

  4. [4]

    Poland, S

    D. Poland, S. Rychkov, and A. Vichi, The Confor- mal Bootstrap: Theory, Numerical Techniques, and Applications, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 015002 (2019), arXiv:1805.04405 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2019

  5. [5]

    S. M. Chester, Weizmann lectures on the numeri- cal conformal bootstrap, Phys. Rept. 1045, 1 (2023), arXiv:1907.05147 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    Hartman, D

    T. Hartman, D. Mazac, D. Simmons-Duffin, and A. Zhiboedov, Snowmass White Paper: The Ana- lytic Conformal Bootstrap, in Snowmass 2021 (2022) arXiv:2202.11012 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2022

  7. [7]

    Bissi, A

    A. Bissi, A. Sinha, and X. Zhou, Selected topics in ana- lytic conformal bootstrap: A guided journey, Phys. Rept. 991, 1 (2022), arXiv:2202.08475 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2022

  8. [8]

    Rychkov and N

    S. Rychkov and N. Su, New developments in the numer- ical conformal bootstrap, Rev. Mod. Phys. 96, 045004 (2024), arXiv:2311.15844 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2024

Show all 79 references
  1. [9]

    Bill` o, V

    M. Bill` o, V. Gon¸ calves, E. Lauria, and M. Meineri, Defects in conformal field theory, JHEP 04, 091, arXiv:1601.02883 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  2. [10]

    Gadde, Conformal constraints on defects, JHEP 01, 038, arXiv:1602.06354 [hep-th]

    A. Gadde, Conformal constraints on defects, JHEP 01, 038, arXiv:1602.06354 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  3. [11]

    Gabai, A

    B. Gabai, A. Sever, and D.-l. Zhong, Bootstrapping smooth conformal defects in Chern-Simons-matter the- ories, JHEP 03, 055, arXiv:2312.17132 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  4. [12]

    Kiryu and S

    N. Kiryu and S. Komatsu, Correlation Functions on the Half-BPS Wilson Loop: Perturbation and Hexagonaliza- tion, JHEP 02, 090, arXiv:1812.04593 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  5. [13]

    Cavagli` a, N

    A. Cavagli` a, N. Gromov, J. Julius, and M. Preti, Boot- strability in defect CFT: integrated correlators and the CFT bootstrap. One prominent example is the set of con- straints derived from supersymmetric localization, [29–49]. An- other example involves integrated correlato...

    arXiv

  6. [14]

    Giombi, R

    S. Giombi, R. Roiban, and A. A. Tseytlin, Half-BPS Wil- son loop and AdS2/CFT1, Nucl. Phys. B922, 499 (2017), arXiv:1706.00756 [hep-th]

    2017 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Liendo, C

    P. Liendo, C. Meneghelli, and V. Mitev, Boot- strapping the half-BPS line defect, JHEP 10, 077, arXiv:1806.01862 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  8. [16]

    Ferrero and C

    P. Ferrero and C. Meneghelli, Unmixing the Wilson line defect CFT. Part II. Analytic bootstrap, JHEP 06, 010, arXiv:2312.12551 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  9. [17]

    Ferrero and C

    P. Ferrero and C. Meneghelli, Unmixing the Wilson line defect CFT. Part I. Spectrum and kinematics, JHEP 05, 090, arXiv:2312.12550 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  10. [18]

    Bianchi, G

    L. Bianchi, G. Bliard, V. Forini, L. Griguolo, and D. Sem- inara, Analytic bootstrap and Witten diagrams for the ABJM Wilson line as defect CFT 1, JHEP 08, 143, arXiv:2004.07849 [hep-th]

    2004 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Bliard, D

    G. Bliard, D. H. Correa, M. Lagares, and I. Salazar Lan- dea, Bootstrapping line defects in AdS 3/CFT2, (2024), arXiv:2410.02685 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Cuomo, Z

    G. Cuomo, Z. Komargodski, and M. Mezei, Local- ized magnetic field in the O(N) model, JHEP 02, 134, arXiv:2112.10634 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  13. [21]

    Gimenez-Grau, E

    A. Gimenez-Grau, E. Lauria, P. Liendo, and P. van Vliet, Bootstrapping line defects with O(2) global symmetry, JHEP 11, 018, arXiv:2208.11715 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  14. [22]

    A. J. Bray and M. A. Moore, Critical behaviour of semi- infinite systems, J. Phys. A 10, 1927 (1977)

    1977

  15. [23]

    Cuomo, M

    G. Cuomo, M. Mezei, and A. Raviv-Moshe, Boundary conformal field theory at large charge, JHEP 10, 143, arXiv:2108.06579 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  16. [24]

    Padayasi, A

    J. Padayasi, A. Krishnan, M. A. Metlitski, I. A. Gruzberg, and M. Meineri, The extraordinary boundary transition in the 3d O(N) model via conformal bootstrap, SciPost Phys. 12, 190 (2022), arXiv:2111.03071 [cond- mat.stat-mech]

    2022 arXiv

  17. [25]

    C. P. Herzog and K.-W. Huang, Boundary Conformal Field Theory and a Boundary Central Charge, JHEP 10, 189, arXiv:1707.06224 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  18. [26]

    Behan, Conformal manifolds: ODEs from OPEs, JHEP 03, 127, arXiv:1709.03967 [hep-th]

    C. Behan, Conformal manifolds: ODEs from OPEs, JHEP 03, 127, arXiv:1709.03967 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  19. [27]

    Bashmakov, M

    V. Bashmakov, M. Bertolini, and H. Raj, On non- supersymmetric conformal manifolds: field theory and 7 holography, JHEP 11, 167, arXiv:1709.01749 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  20. [28]

    Drukker, Z

    N. Drukker, Z. Kong, and G. Sakkas, Broken Global Symmetries and Defect Conformal Manifolds, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 201603 (2022), arXiv:2203.17157 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Gabai, A

    B. Gabai, A. Sever, and D.-l. Zhong, Line operators in Chern-Simons-Matter theories and Bosonization in Three Dimensions II: Perturbative analysis and all-loop resum- mation, JHEP 04, 070, arXiv:2212.02518 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  22. [30]

    N. B. Agmon, S. M. Chester, and S. S. Pufu, Solving M-theory with the Conformal Bootstrap, JHEP 06, 159, arXiv:1711.07343 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  23. [31]

    D. J. Binder, S. M. Chester, S. S. Pufu, and Y. Wang, N = 4 Super-Yang-Mills correlators at strong coupling from string theory and localization, JHEP 12, 119, arXiv:1902.06263 [hep-th]

    1902 arXiv

  24. [32]

    N. B. Agmon, S. M. Chester, and S. S. Pufu, The M- theory Archipelago, JHEP 02, 010, arXiv:1907.13222 [hep-th]

    1907 arXiv

  25. [33]

    S. M. Chester, R. R. Kalloor, and A. Sharon, Squashing, Mass, and Holography for 3d Sphere Free Energy, JHEP 04, 244, arXiv:2102.05643 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  26. [34]

    L. F. Alday, S. M. Chester, and H. Raj, ABJM at strong coupling from M-theory, localization, and Lorentzian in- version, JHEP 02, 005, arXiv:2107.10274 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  27. [35]

    S. M. Chester, Bootstrapping 4d N = 2 gauge theories: the case of SQCD, JHEP 01, 107, arXiv:2205.12978 [hep- th]

    arXiv

  28. [36]

    S. M. Chester, R. Dempsey, and S. S. Pufu, Bootstrap- ping N = 4 super-Yang-Mills on the conformal manifold, JHEP 01, 038, arXiv:2111.07989 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  29. [37]

    S. M. Chester, R. Dempsey, and S. S. Pufu, Level repul- sion in N = 4 super-Yang-Mills via integrability, hologra- phy, and the bootstrap, JHEP 07, 059, arXiv:2312.12576 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  30. [38]

    S. M. Chester, S. S. Pufu, Y. Wang, and X. Yin, Bootstrapping M-theory orbifolds, JHEP 06, 001, arXiv:2312.13112 [hep-th]

  31. [39]

    Caron-Huot, F

    S. Caron-Huot, F. Coronado, and Z. Zahraee, Bootstrap- ping N = 4 sYM correlators using Integrability and Lo- calization, (2024), arXiv:2412.00249 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Caron-Huot, F

    S. Caron-Huot, F. Coronado, A.-K. Trinh, and Z. Zahraee, Bootstrapping N = 4 sYM correlators using integrability, JHEP 02, 083, arXiv:2207.01615 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  33. [41]

    Wen and S.-Q

    C. Wen and S.-Q. Zhang, Integrated correlators in N = 4 super Yang-Mills and periods, JHEP 05, 126, arXiv:2203.01890 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  34. [42]

    Dorigoni, M

    D. Dorigoni, M. B. Green, and C. Wen, Exact results for duality-covariant integrated correlators in N = 4 SYM with general classical gauge groups, SciPost Phys. 13, 092 (2022), arXiv:2202.05784 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Dorigoni, M

    D. Dorigoni, M. B. Green, and C. Wen, Novel Represen- tation of an Integrated Correlator in N = 4 Supersym- metric Yang-Mills Theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 161601 (2021), arXiv:2102.08305 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  36. [44]

    S. M. Chester and S. S. Pufu, Far beyond the planar limit in strongly-coupled N = 4 SYM, JHEP 01, 103, arXiv:2003.08412 [hep-th]

    2003 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Brown, P

    A. Brown, P. Heslop, C. Wen, and H. Xie, Integrated correlators in N = 4 SYM beyond localisation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 101602 (2024), arXiv:2308.07219 [hep- th]

    2024 arXiv

  38. [46]

    S. M. Chester, M. B. Green, S. S. Pufu, Y. Wang, and C. Wen, New modular invariants in N = 4 Super-Yang- Mills theory, JHEP 04, 212, arXiv:2008.02713 [hep-th]

    2008 arXiv

  39. [47]

    L. F. Alday, S. M. Chester, D. Dorigoni, M. B. Green, and C. Wen, Relations between integrated correlators in N = 4 supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory, JHEP05, 044, arXiv:2310.12322 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  40. [48]

    Dorigoni, M

    D. Dorigoni, M. B. Green, C. Wen, and H. Xie, Modular- invariant large-N completion of an integrated correlator in N = 4 supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory, JHEP 04, 114, arXiv:2210.14038 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  41. [49]

    H. Paul, E. Perlmutter, and H. Raj, Integrated correla- tors in N = 4 SYM via SL(2, Z) spectral theory, JHEP 01, 149, arXiv:2209.06639 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  42. [50]

    Dorigoni, Note on ’t Hooft-line defect integrated cor- relators in N=4 supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory, Phys

    D. Dorigoni, Note on ’t Hooft-line defect integrated cor- relators in N=4 supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory, Phys. Rev. D 110, L121702 (2024), arXiv:2410.02377 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Cavagli` a, N

    A. Cavagli` a, N. Gromov, J. Julius, and M. Preti, Inte- grability and conformal bootstrap: One dimensional de- fect conformal field theory, Phys. Rev. D 105, L021902 (2022), arXiv:2107.08510 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Cavagli` a, N

    A. Cavagli` a, N. Gromov, J. Julius, and M. Preti, Inte- grated correlators from integrability: Maldacena-Wilson line in N = 4 SYM, JHEP 04, 026, arXiv:2211.03203 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  45. [53]

    Cavagli` a, N

    A. Cavagli` a, N. Gromov, and M. Preti, Computing four- point functions with integrability, bootstrap and parity symmetry, JHEP 02, 026, arXiv:2312.11604 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  46. [54]

    Cavagli` a, N

    A. Cavagli` a, N. Gromov, J. Julius, M. Preti, and N. S. Sokolova, Probing Line Defect CFT with Mixed- Correlator Bootstrability, (2024), arXiv:2412.07624 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Gabai, A

    B. Gabai, A. Sever, and D.-l. Zhong, Work in progress,

  48. [56]

    Drukker, P

    N. Drukker, P. Kravchuk, and Z. Kong, To appear,

  49. [57]

    Gabai, A

    B. Gabai, A. Sever, and D.-l. Zhong, Line Operators in Chern-Simons–Matter Theories and Bosonization in Three Dimensions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 121604 (2022), arXiv:2204.05262 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Pappadopulo, S

    D. Pappadopulo, S. Rychkov, J. Espin, and R. Rattazzi, OPE Convergence in Conformal Field Theory, Phys. Rev. D 86, 105043 (2012), arXiv:1208.6449 [hep-th]

    2012 arXiv

  51. [59]

    N. B. Agmon and Y. Wang, Classifying Superconformal Defects in Diverse Dimensions Part I: Superconformal Lines, (2020), arXiv:2009.06650 [hep-th]

    2020 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Gunaydin and R

    M. Gunaydin and R. J. Scalise, Unitary Lowest Weight Representations of the Noncompact Supergroup Osp(2m*/2n), J. Math. Phys. 32, 599 (1991)

    1991

  53. [61]

    Dorey and A

    N. Dorey and A. Singleton, An Index for Superconformal Quantum Mechanics, JHEP arXiv:1812.11816 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  54. [62]

    Eberhardt, Summing over Geometries in String The- ory, JHEP 05, 233, arXiv:2102.12355 [hep-th]

    L. Eberhardt, Summing over Geometries in String The- ory, JHEP 05, 233, arXiv:2102.12355 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  55. [63]

    F. A. Dolan and H. Osborn, Conformal four point func- tions and the operator product expansion, Nucl. Phys. B 599, 459 (2001), arXiv:hep-th/0011040

    2001 arXiv

  56. [64]

    F. A. Dolan and H. Osborn, Conformal partial waves and the operator product expansion, Nucl. Phys. B 678, 491 (2004), arXiv:hep-th/0309180

    2004 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Jackiw and S

    R. Jackiw and S. Y. Pi, Conformal Blocks for the 4-Point Function in Conformal Quantum Mechanics, Phys. Rev. D 86, 045017 (2012), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 86, 089905 (2012)], arXiv:1205.0443 [hep-th]

    2012 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Ghosh, A

    K. Ghosh, A. Kaviraj, and M. F. Paulos, Polyakov blocks for the 1D conformal field theory mixed- correlator bootstrap, Phys. Rev. D 109, L061703 (2024), arXiv:2307.01257 [hep-th]. 8 SUPPLEMENT AL MA TERIAL Appendix A: Derivation of the Constraints The key idea that leads to th...

    2024 arXiv

  59. [67]

    proper time

    Double Integration The double integration term consists of two ordered insertions of displacement operators along the line. They come in three possible orderings [int2] = Z τ1<0<τ2 dτ1dτ2 vi(τ1)vj(τ2) ⟨ ⟨Di(τ1)OI (0)Dj(τ2)OJ (∞)⟩ ⟩ + Z 0<τ1<τ2 dτ1dτ2 vi(τ1)vj(τ2) ⟨ ⟨OI (0)Di(τ...

  60. [68]

    We would like to enumerate all such terms that are consistent with the SL(2, R × SO(d − 1) symmetry of the straight line

    Single Integration For a single integral, the two deformations can be either integrated together or one is integrated and the other is at the location of one of the O operators. We would like to enumerate all such terms that are consistent with the SL(2, R × SO(d − 1) symmetry...

  61. [69]

    The only scalar operator that is a singlet under all internal symmetries and has integer dimension ∆ < 4 is the identity

  62. [70]

    Under this assumption, we find that for a generic spacetime dimension, the only terms with a single bulk integration and a non-zero expectation value are total derivatives

    There is no operator of dimension ∆ O + 1 that otherwise has the same charges as O and a spin larger by one unit. Under this assumption, we find that for a generic spacetime dimension, the only terms with a single bulk integration and a non-zero expectation value are total der...

  63. [71]

    In total, such terms have zero SO(d − 1) transverse spin and zero SL(2, R) conformal dimension

    Boundary T erms We now list all the boundary terms that are allowed by the SL(2, R) × SO(d − 1) symmetry of the straight line. In total, such terms have zero SO(d − 1) transverse spin and zero SL(2, R) conformal dimension. Since the two v’s together have dimension minus two an...

  64. [72]

    This restricted kinematical configuration is sufficient for the derivation of the constraints. The boundary terms that are allowed in any CFT are [B0B0] = ⟨ ⟨ γ0v+ 0 v− 0 d2OI (0) + γ1 v+ 0 dv− 0 + v− 0 dv+ 0 dOI (0) + γ4 v+ 0 dv− 0 − v− 0 dv+ 0 dOI (0) + γ3dv+ 0 dv− 0 + γ2 v+...

  65. [73]

    We start with a non-straight path parameterized by v( τ ) = v a(τ )

    Source T erm We now choose the deformation vector in (1) that will lead to the constraints presented in the main text. We start with a non-straight path parameterized by v( τ ) = v a(τ ). At the second order, applying to it a conformal transformation amounts to simply adding t...

  66. [74]

    We consider each of these orders in turn and separate between the cases where ˜ v a(s) is regular or has a pole at the support of the delta function in [int 2], (A14)

    Constraints The constraints arise from equating δ2⟨ ⟨O(0)O(∞)⟩ ⟩in (A3) with the source term at orders O(v2 c ) and O(vavc). We consider each of these orders in turn and separate between the cases where ˜ v a(s) is regular or has a pole at the support of the delta function in ...

  67. [75]

    The homogeneous and inhomogeneous constraints each reduce to a single independent nontrivial constraint

    Simplified Constraints for O = D In the case where the operator O in (7) is the displacement operator and I = J = i = j, we have a single four- point function to consider and we can use crossing symmetry to map all the integration regions to t ∈ [0, 1]. The homogeneous and inh...

  68. [76]

    Preliminary The 1/2 BPS Wilson loop in N = 4 SYM theory preserves an osp(4∗|4) superconformal subgroup. Consequently, defect operators are labeled by their conformal dimension ∆, their representation under the so(3) transverse rotation group, and an sp(4) ≃ so(5) R-symmetry Dy...

  69. [77]

    Simplifing the Homogeneous Constraint Here, we will show that the homogeneous constraints fix the leading OPE behavior of the reduced correlator. After subtracting FGFF, we plug the form of the correlator (D7) into the homogeneous constraints (9) and perform multiple integrati...

  70. [78]

    We then perform integrations by parts to remove the derivatives from the reduced correlator

    Simplifying the Inhomogeneous Constraint As before, we subtract from (D4) FGFF and plug the result into the inhomogeneous constraints (11) and (12). We then perform integrations by parts to remove the derivatives from the reduced correlator. We first consider the constraint (1...

  71. [79]

    (E3) In the following, we find that our integrated constraints can also be used to fix this relation without using the result of the holographic computation

    determine, b1 + 4b2 + 6/π = 0 . (E3) In the following, we find that our integrated constraints can also be used to fix this relation without using the result of the holographic computation. Note that without additional input, any bootstrap computation cannot fix a moduli of a ...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.