Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Composite operators in $\mathcal{N}=4$ Super Yang-Mills

T0 review · 3 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 Protected-sector data alone fix a double-trace supergravity correlator.

desk verdict The double-trace reconstruction is solid, but the twist-six mixing equations are internally inconsistent as printed, so the headline triple-trace claim is currently unsupported. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.19788 v1 pith:JZ5OKEGS submitted 2024-12-27 hep-th

Agnese Bissi , Giulia Fardelli , Andrea Manenti This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-th MSC 81T4081T60
keywords N=4superYang-Millsdouble-traceoperatorstriple-tracesuperconformalbootstrapLorentzianinversionformulaAdS/CFTcorrespondencesupergravitycorrelatorslargecentralchargelimit
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

This paper asks whether the standard bootstrap strategy for single-trace half-BPS operators in N=4 Super Yang-Mills can be extended to composite (double-trace) external operators. The authors consider the four-point function of two stress-tensor multiplets O2 and two dimension-four double-trace operators $O_dt^{4}$ in the large central charge and strong coupling limit, and they show that the protected subsector — operators whose dimensions and OPE coefficients receive no quantum corrections — completely determines the tree-level supergravity correlator. The central output is a closed-form expression for $H^{{sugra,dt}}$_{2244} (Eq. 5.9), and from it the authors extract twist-six OPE data, including an anomalous dimension \gamma = \Gamma = -30/((\ell+4)(\ell+5)) in the odd-spin [0,2,0] channel, which they read as direct evidence for triple-trace operators. The significance is that composite states in the CFT, dual to multi-particle bound states in AdS, can be studied with the same analytic bootstrap technology used for single-particle operators.

What carries the argument

The central object is the reduced correlator H_{p_1 p_2 p_3 p_4}(z,\bar z;\$\alpha$,\bar\$\alpha$) obtained from the superconformal Ward identity decomposition G = k + G_{\hat f} + R H. The protected part (k, \hat f) is fixed by free theory, and the short-multiplet contributions inside H are resummed from protected OPE data. The load-bearing identity is the double discontinuity dDisc[H], computed after crossing via F_short (Eq. 2.9) and fed into the Lorentzian inversion formula; because only negative powers of v in the crossed channel can contribute to dDisc at order 1/c, the resummed protected contributions uniquely determine the full tree-level supergravity correlator. A key input is the next-to-extremal correlator ⟨$O2O2O2O_dt^{4}$⟩, which is non-renormalized and supplies the twist-four [0,2,0] OPE coefficients needed for the 4224 channel.

What would settle it

Compute the correlator ⟨$O2O2O_dt^{4}$ $O_dt^{4}$⟩ at order 1/c by an independent method, such as a direct supergravity Witten-diagram calculation for the double-trace external states or a full bootstrap that does not assume the double discontinuity is protected-only, and check whether the dDisc of (5.9) matches the protected contributions. Any mismatch at twist six would show that long operators enter dDisc at order 1/c and disprove the reconstruction.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that the correlation function ⟨O2 O2 $O_dt^{4}$ $O_dt^{4}$⟩ in N=4 SYM is, at tree level in the supergravity limit (large central charge c and large 't Hooft coupling), fully fixed by superconformal symmetry together with the data of protected operators. Concretely, using superconformal Ward identities the reduced correlator is split into protected pieces k and \hat{f} (determined from free theory) and a remaining function H, whose short-multiplet part H_short is resummed from protected OPE coefficients; the double discontinuity of the crossed channel F_short is then the sole input to the Lorentzian inversion formula. The result is $H^{{sugra,dt}}$_{2244} = 2 + 2/$v^{2}$ + (1/c)(1 + 1/$v^{2}$ + 6/v - 2 $u^{2}$ D_{2422}), which the authors show agrees with a recent holographic computation [22]. Expanding this correlator in superconformal blocks, they obtain the twist-two and twist-four OPE coefficients in the double-trace sector and, at twist six, solve the mixing between double- and triple-trace operators for odd spin, finding the anomalous dimension \gamma_1 = \Gamma = -30/((\ell+4)(\ell+5)) and the relation \$lambda^{{sp}}$_{42 D_1} = \sqrt{(\ell+4)(\ell+5)/((\ell+3)(\ell+6))} \$lambda^{{dt}}$_{42 T}.

Load-bearing premise

The reconstruction assumes that at order 1/c in the large central charge expansion, the double discontinuity of the crossed correlator receives contributions only from protected twist-two and twist-four operators; if a long multiplet contributed to dDisc at this order, the reconstructed correlator (5.9) would be missing terms.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If (5.9) is correct, the full tree-level correlator of two stress tensors and two double-trace dimension-four operators is now known in closed form, providing a benchmark for direct Witten-diagram computations of two-particle bound states in AdS5×S5.
  • The twist-six OPE data imply that triple-trace operators appear already at tree level in the O2 × O_dt^4 OPE, with anomalous dimension \Gamma = -30/((\ell+4)(\ell+5)) in the odd-spin [0,2,0] sector; this is a concrete CFT prediction for the binding-energy spectrum of three-particle states.
  • The result demonstrates that the protected-subsector bootstrap, previously applied to identical single-trace operators, extends to correlators with composite external states, where crossing mixes two distinct channels (2244 and 4224).
  • The OPE coefficients extracted in Appendix G, such as \langle a^{(0)}\gamma^{(1)}\rangle^{dt}_{2244}, are new analytic inputs that constrain one-loop corrections and any future bootstrap of the order c^{-2} correlator.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same machinery should apply to the higher-dimension double-trace operators constructed in Appendix A (p ≥ 5), where the free-theory basis contains triple-trace states; the anomalous dimensions of these operators would extend the triple-trace spectrum beyond twist six.
  • A direct bulk computation of the four-point Witten diagram with two Kaluza-Klein gravitons and a two-particle bound state would provide an independent check of the D-term structure in (5.9) and of the absence of long-operator contributions at order 1/c.
  • The paper's assumption that only protected operators contribute to dDisc at order 1/c could be tested by extracting the full order-c^{-2} logarithms; if long twist-six operators contribute to dDisc, the equality (5.9) would be modified by terms that the current argument cannot see.
  • The factorization O_dt^4 ~ O_2^2 suggests the tree-level correlator is essentially a symmetrized product of H_2222, so one could conjecture that higher-point functions of double-trace operators factorize similarly at leading order.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies four-point functions of half-BPS operators involving the dimension-four double-trace operator Odt4 and the single-particle operator Osp4 in N=4 SYM at large central charge and strong coupling. After defining an orthogonal basis and using superconformal Ward identities to isolate protected from unprotected contributions, the authors extract free-theory data, resum the short/semi-short contributions to the reduced correlators, and feed the resulting double discontinuity into the Lorentzian inversion formula. In this way they reconstruct the tree-level supergravity correlator Hsugra,dt_2244, given in Eq. (5.9), and then attempt to extract twist-six OPE data in the singlet and [0,2,0] R-symmetry channels, including the odd-spin anomalous dimension gamma1 = Gamma = -30/((ell+4)(ell+5)) in Eq. (6.16) and the suggestion that a triple-trace operator may be the only exchange in Odt4 x O2. The paper is largely computational, with many technical steps relegated to appendices.

Significance. If valid, the paper extends the protected-data bootstrap strategy of [25] to correlators with external double-trace operators, and its central result Eq. (5.9) agrees with the independent holographic computation in [22], which is a strong positive check. The paper contains no fitted parameters; the inputs are protected, coupling-independent data together with free-theory results and standard non-renormalization statements, and the output is a falsifiable prediction for a supergravity correlator and for higher-trace OPE data. These are genuine strengths. However, the genuinely new twist-six OPE results in Sec. 6.2 currently rest on a system of equations that, as printed, has no real solution, so the main novel claim is not yet supported.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 6.2, Eq. (6.15)] The first two equations of the system (6.15) equate sums of squares of OPE coefficients to strictly negative quantities: for odd ell >= 1, every factor on the right-hand sides of the first two lines is positive, so the right-hand sides are negative, while the left-hand sides are sums of squares of real OPE coefficients and must be nonnegative in a unitary theory. The same obstruction affects the anomalous-dimension equations: with the proposed solution gamma1 = Gamma = -30/((ell+4)(ell+5)), the left-hand sides of the fourth and fifth equations are negative semidefinite, whereas the printed right-hand sides are positive. As printed, the system (6.15) has no real solution, and consequently the solution (6.16)-(6.17), including the triple-trace interpretation and the statement that a possible solution is lambda^{sp}_{42T}=0=lambda^{dt}_{42D1}, is not established. Please either specify that the quantities labelled lambda^2 are actually signed products a = lambda_{...}lambda_{...} (which would conflict with the square-root relations in (6.17)), or correct the signs of the equations and re-derive the OPE data.
  2. [Sec. 5, after Eq. (5.1)] The reconstruction of Hsugra,dt_2244 relies on the assertion that at order 1/c the only non-vanishing contributions to the double discontinuity come from negative powers of v, hence from protected twist-two and twist-four exchanges in the crossed channel. This statement is asserted rather than proved: the text does not demonstrate that long multiplets cannot contribute to this part of the double discontinuity at this order. Since this assumption is what converts the protected data of Secs. 3 and 4 into the full tree-level supergravity correlator, it is load-bearing for the central claim. The final agreement with [22] provides an external check that mitigates the risk, but a self-contained CFT derivation should justify this step or state clearly that it is an assumption.
  3. [Sec. 6.2, Eqs. (6.16)-(6.17)] Even if the sign issue in (6.15) were corrected, the solution as written requires an explicit convention for the sign and branch of the square roots in (6.17). The paper states that lambda^{sp}_{42T}=0=lambda^{dt}_{42D1} is a possible solution, but the first equation would then read (lambda^{dt}_{42T})^2 = negative as printed, which is impossible. This reinforces that the notation in (6.15) needs to be clarified: either the lambdas are true OPE coefficients and several signs are wrong, or they are signed products and the square-root notation in (6.17) is misleading. The current presentation does not admit either consistent reading.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 6.2, opening paragraph] "particular simple" should read "particularly simple".
  2. [Sec. 5, Eq. (5.10)] The factorization heuristic in Eq. (5.10) is stated without derivation; the factor 4 should be justified from the normalization of Odt4 in Eq. (2.1b) or explicitly flagged as illustrative.
  3. [Sec. 6.1, Eq. (6.8)] The disconnected contribution Hdt4444|disc is shown without an equation number; please add a number so that the subsequent discussion can refer to it.
  4. [Appendix D, Eq. (D.8)] The normalization factors in Appendix D are delicate: the factor of 6 relating the conventions of [4] to those used here is introduced ad hoc. Please state the normalization convention used for the OPE coefficients entering Eq. (6.15), since the positivity/sign analysis depends on it.
  5. [Abstract] The abstract says the authors "fix the non protected part of such correlators up to subleading order in the large central charge expansion," while the concrete construction is at tree level, order 1/c; the wording could be sharpened to avoid implying loop orders are obtained.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: Eq. (5.9) and the twist-six OPE data are outputs of fixed protected free-theory data fed into the Lorentzian inversion formula, with no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The protected data are fixed without fitting: k and G_hat-f are free-theory Wick contractions constrained by superconformal Ward identities, and the C[0,2,0]_ell coefficients (3.10) are read from the non-renormalized next-to-extremal correlator together with lambda^2_22C from Dolan-Osborn. Section 4 resums these into H_short, and Section 5 uses dDisc[F_short] as the input to the Lorentzian inversion formula. The central result (5.9) is the correlator whose dDisc is fixed by that input; the coefficient of -2u^2 D_2422 is determined by the independently computed delta H_short (4.13), not by fitting to the final answer. The twist-six anomalous dimensions and OPE data of Section 6 are extracted from the reconstructed correlators, so they are outputs rather than inputs. The agreement with [22] is an external cross-check, not a premise. The paper's protected-only dDisc statement after Eq. (5.1) is a physical assumption about which operators can contribute, and the sign issue in Eq. (6.15) is a mathematical consistency concern; neither is an identity that makes the result equivalent to its inputs. Self-citations such as [21] are motivational and not load-bearing.

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

The central claim is derived from symmetry and protected data; no numerical constants are fitted and no new dynamical entities are postulated. The input axioms are standard superconformal representation theory, the non-renormalization theorem for next-to-extremal correlators, and the Lorentzian inversion formula, plus the large-c twist-gap assumption stated in Sec. 2.2.

assumptions (5)
  • standard math Superconformal Ward identity decomposition (2.6) into k, G^f, R H, separating short and semi-short multiplets from long multiplets, as in Dolan-Osborn [4].
    Invoked in Sec. 2.2 to define the strategy and to isolate Hshort from Hlong.
  • domain assumption Next-to-extremal correlators ⟨O2O2O2O4⟩ are non-renormalised, so free-theory results fix the protected OPE coefficients entering Hshort.
    Used in Sec. 3.1 and Sec. 4.2 to extract the twist-four OPE coefficients lambda_C24dt from the protected correlator, relying on [27,28].
  • domain assumption In the large central charge, supergravity limit, long H contains no single-trace operators and the twist gap is min(p1+p2, p3+p4); at order 1/c only protected twist-two and twist-four exchanges contribute to dDisc.
    This is the load-bearing assumption stated after Eq. (5.1) in Sec. 5, used to replace the full dDisc input by Fshort.
  • standard math The Lorentzian inversion formula of Caron-Huot [26] reconstructs the full H from its double discontinuity.
    Applied in Sec. 5 and Appendix H to convert protected data into the tree-level supergravity correlator.
  • domain assumption The orthonormal basis (2.1) at p=4 correctly identifies Osp4 as the single-particle state and Odt4 as the pure double-trace state.
    This basis, taken from [11,12,23,24], defines the external operators whose correlators are the subject of the paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Composite operators in $\mathcal{N}=4$ Super Yang-Mills." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JZ5OKEGS

@misc{pith2026241219788,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Composite operators in $\mathcalN=4$ Super Yang-Mills},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JZ5OKEGS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.19788}
}
read the original abstract

We consider four-point functions of protected, double- and single-trace operators in the large central charge limit. We use superconformal symmetry to disentangle the contribution of protected operators in the partial wave decomposition. With this information, we fix the non protected part of such correlators up to subleading order in the large central charge expansion. We particularly focus on the triple-trace sector of the correlator and comment on the connection to the holographic description 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. Dissecting supergraviton six-point function with lightcone limits and chiral algebra

    hep-th 2025-02 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A bootstrap combining lightcone OPEs with chiral algebra and a topological twist determines the six-point supergraviton Mellin amplitude in AdS5 x S5 up to an overall constant, passing a flat-space KLT check.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [22]

    Aprile, S

    F. Aprile, S. Giusto and R. Russo, Holographic correlators with BPS bound states in N = 4 SYM, 2409.12911

    arXiv

  2. [25]

    Alday and S

    L.F. Alday and S. Caron-Huot, Gravitational S-matrix from CFT dispersion relations , JHEP 12 (2018) 017 [1711.02031]

    arXiv 2018

  3. [1]

    Rattazzi, V.S

    R. Rattazzi, V.S. Rychkov, E. Tonni and A. Vichi, Bounding scalar operator dimensions in 4D CFT , JHEP 12 (2008) 031 [0807.0004]

    arXiv 2008

  4. [2]

    Poland, S

    D. Poland, S. Rychkov and A. Vichi, The Conformal Bootstrap: Theory, Numerical Techniques, and Applications , Rev. Mod. Phys. 91 (2019) 015002 [1805.04405]

    arXiv 2019

  5. [3]

    Bissi, A

    A. Bissi, A. Sinha and X. Zhou, Selected Topics in Analytic Conformal Bootstrap: A Guided Journey, 2202.08475

    arXiv

  6. [4]

    Dolan and H

    F.A. Dolan and H. Osborn, Conformal partial wave expansions for N=4 chiral four point functions, Annals Phys. 321 (2006) 581 [hep-th/0412335]

    arXiv 2006

  7. [5]

    Alday and A

    L.F. Alday and A. Bissi, Loop Corrections to Supergravity on AdS5 × S5, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 (2017) 171601 [1706.02388]

    arXiv 2017

  8. [6]

    Bissi, G

    A. Bissi, G. Fardelli and A. Georgoudis, Towards all loop supergravity amplitudes on AdS5×S5 , Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) L041901 [2002.04604]

    arXiv 2021

Show all 44 references
  1. [7]

    Bissi, G

    A. Bissi, G. Fardelli and A. Georgoudis, All loop structures in supergravity amplitudes on AdS5 × S5 from CFT , J. Phys. A 54 (2021) 324002 [2010.12557]

    2021 arXiv

  2. [8]

    Aprile, J.M

    F. Aprile, J.M. Drummond, P. Heslop and H. Paul, Quantum Gravity from Conformal Field Theory, JHEP 01 (2018) 035 [1706.02822]

    2018 arXiv

  3. [9]

    Aprile, J.M

    F. Aprile, J.M. Drummond, P. Heslop and H. Paul, Unmixing Supergravity, JHEP 02 (2018) 133 [1706.08456]

    2018 arXiv

  4. [10]

    Aprile, J.M

    F. Aprile, J.M. Drummond, P. Heslop and H. Paul, Loop corrections for Kaluza-Klein AdS amplitudes, JHEP 05 (2018) 056 [1711.03903]

    2018 arXiv

  5. [11]

    Aprile, J

    F. Aprile, J. Drummond, P. Heslop and H. Paul, Double-trace spectrum of N = 4 supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory at strong coupling , Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018) 126008 [1802.06889]

    2018 arXiv

  6. [12]

    Aprile, J

    F. Aprile, J. Drummond, P. Heslop and H. Paul, One-loop amplitudes in AdS 5×S 5 supergravity from N = 4 SYM at strong coupling , JHEP 03 (2020) 190 [1912.01047]

    2020 arXiv

  7. [13]

    Drummond and H

    J.M. Drummond and H. Paul, Two-loop supergravity on AdS 5×S 5 from CFT , JHEP 08 (2022) 275 [2204.01829]. – 32 –

    2022 arXiv

  8. [14]

    Gonçalves, R

    V. Gonçalves, R. Pereira and X. Zhou, 20′ Five-Point Function from AdS5 × S5 Supergravity, JHEP 10 (2019) 247 [1906.05305]

    2019 arXiv

  9. [15]

    Gonçalves, C

    V. Gonçalves, C. Meneghelli, R. Pereira, J. Vilas Boas a nd X. Zhou, Kaluza-Klein Five-Point Functions from AdS 5 × S5 Supergravity, 2302.01896

    arXiv

  10. [16]

    Antunes, M.S

    A. Antunes, M.S. Costa, V. Goncalves and J.V. Boas, Lightcone bootstrap at higher points , JHEP 03 (2022) 139 [2111.05453]

    2022 arXiv

  11. [17]

    Harris, A

    S. Harris, A. Kaviraj, J.A. Mann, L. Quintavalle and V. S chomerus, Comb channel lightcone bootstrap: triple-twist anomalous dimensions , JHEP 08 (2024) 122 [2401.10986]

    2024 arXiv

  12. [18]

    Kaviraj, J.A

    A. Kaviraj, J.A. Mann, L. Quintavalle and V. Schomerus, Multipoint lightcone bootstrap from differential equations , JHEP 08 (2023) 011 [2212.10578]

    2023 arXiv

  13. [19]

    Alday, V

    L.F. Alday, V. Gonçalves and X. Zhou, Supersymmetric Five-Point Gluon Amplitudes in AdS Space, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128 (2022) 161601 [2201.04422]

    2022 arXiv

  14. [20]

    Alday, V

    L.F. Alday, V. Gonçalves, M. Nocchi and X. Zhou, Six-point AdS gluon amplitudes from flat space and factorization , Phys. Rev. Res. 6 (2024) L012041 [2307.06884]

    2024 arXiv

  15. [21]

    Bissi, G

    A. Bissi, G. Fardelli and A. Manenti, Rebooting quarter-BPS operators in N = 4 super Yang-Mills, JHEP 04 (2022) 016 [2111.06857]

    2022 arXiv

  16. [23]

    Alday and X

    L.F. Alday and X. Zhou, Simplicity of AdS Supergravity at One Loop , JHEP 09 (2020) 008 [1912.02663]

    2020 arXiv

  17. [24]

    Aprile, J.M

    F. Aprile, J.M. Drummond, P. Heslop, H. Paul, F. Sanfilip po, M. Santagata et al., Single particle operators and their correlators in free N = 4 SYM , JHEP 11 (2020) 072 [2007.09395]

    2020 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Caron-Huot, Analyticity in Spin in Conformal Theories , JHEP 09 (2017) 078 [1703.00278]

    S. Caron-Huot, Analyticity in Spin in Conformal Theories , JHEP 09 (2017) 078 [1703.00278]

    2017 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Erdmenger and M

    J. Erdmenger and M. Perez-Victoria, Nonrenormalization of next-to-extremal correlators in N=4 SYM and the AdS / CFT correspondence , Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000) 045008 [hep-th/9912250]

    2000 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Eden, P.S

    B.U. Eden, P.S. Howe, E. Sokatchev and P.C. West, Extremal and next-to-extremal n point correlators in four-dimensional SCFT , Phys. Lett. B 494 (2000) 141 [hep-th/0004102]

    2000 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Dolan and H

    F.A. Dolan and H. Osborn, On short and semi-short representations for four-dimensional superconformal symmetry, Annals Phys. 307 (2003) 41 [hep-th/0209056]

    2003 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Maldacena and A

    J. Maldacena and A. Zhiboedov, Constraining Conformal Field Theories with A Higher Spin Symmetry, J. Phys. A 46 (2013) 214011 [1112.1016]

    2013 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Alba and K

    V. Alba and K. Diab, Constraining conformal field theories with a higher spin symme try in d=4, 1307.8092

    arXiv

  24. [32]

    Doobary and P

    R. Doobary and P. Heslop, Superconformal partial waves in Grassmannian field theories , JHEP 12 (2015) 159 [1508.03611]. – 33 –

    2015 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Aharony, L.F

    O. Aharony, L.F. Alday, A. Bissi and E. Perlmutter, Loops in AdS from Conformal Field Theory, JHEP 07 (2017) 036 [1612.03891]

    2017 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Caron-Huot and A.-K

    S. Caron-Huot and A.-K. Trinh, All tree-level correlators in AdS 5×S5 supergravity: hidden ten-dimensional conformal symmetry , JHEP 01 (2019) 196 [1809.09173]

    2019 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Heemskerk, J

    I. Heemskerk, J. Penedones, J. Polchinski and J. Sully, Holography from Conformal Field Theory, JHEP 10 (2009) 079 [0907.0151]

    2009 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Carmi and S

    D. Carmi and S. Caron-Huot, A Conformal Dispersion Relation: Correlations from Absorption, JHEP 09 (2020) 009 [1910.12123]

    2020 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Fardelli, A.L

    G. Fardelli, A.L. Fitzpatrick and W. Li, Holography and Regge phases with U(1) charge , JHEP 08 (2024) 202 [2403.07079]

    2024 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Alday, C

    L.F. Alday, C. Behan, P. Ferrero and X. Zhou, Gluon Scattering in AdS from CFT , JHEP 06 (2021) 020 [2103.15830]

    2021 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Alday, A

    L.F. Alday, A. Bissi and X. Zhou, One-loop gluon amplitudes in AdS , JHEP 02 (2022) 105 [2110.09861]

    2022 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Behan, S.M

    C. Behan, S.M. Chester and P. Ferrero, Towards bootstrapping F-theory, JHEP 10 (2024) 161 [2403.17049]

    2024

  33. [41]

    Huang, B

    Z. Huang, B. Wang, E.Y. Yuan and X. Zhou, AdS super gluon scattering up to two loops: a position space approach, JHEP 07 (2023) 053 [2301.13240]

    2023 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Bissi, G

    A. Bissi, G. Fardelli, A. Manenti and X. Zhou, Spinning correlators in N = 2 SCFTs: Superspace and AdS amplitudes , JHEP 01 (2023) 021 [2209.01204]

    2023 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Huang, B

    Z. Huang, B. Wang, E.Y. Yuan and X. Zhou, Simplicity of AdS super Yang-Mills at one loop , JHEP 01 (2024) 190 [2309.14413]

    2024 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Arutyunov, S

    G. Arutyunov, S. Frolov and A.C. Petkou, Operator product expansion of the lowest weight CPOs in N = 4 SYM4 at strong coupling , Nucl. Phys. B 586 (2000) 547 [hep-th/0005182]. – 34 –

    2000 arXiv

Pith tools

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