Quantum flux operators in the fermionic theory and their supersymmetric extension

Jiang Long; Si-Mao Guo; Wen-Bin Liu

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

Quantum flux operators in the fermionic theory and their supersymmetric extension

T0 review · 3 major / 4 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 Superrotation flux commutators in massless Dirac theory close only through a helicity flux operator, which the Wess-Zumino extension identifies as R-symmetry.

desk verdict Fermionic flux algebra with helicity flux and WZ extension is a real construction, but the unconstrained algebra's Jacobi violation is unresolved and needs to be presented as a formal intermediate rather than the headline result. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.20829 v1 pith:LM3DMYAI submitted 2024-12-30 hep-th gr-qc

Si-Mao Guo , Wen-Bin Liu , Jiang Long This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-thgr-qc MSC 81T6083C3081R10

keywords quantumfluxoperatorshelicitymasslessDiractheoryfuturenullinfinityWess-Zuminomodelsuper-BMSalgebrasuperdualityRsymmetry

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

At future null infinity of a massless Dirac theory, this paper constructs quantum flux operators for the Poincaré charges and for chiral symmetry, and shows that the superrotation generators do not close among themselves: their commutator contains a local helicity flux operator. The same helicity flux appears as the boundary reduction of the non-closure of Lie transport of a spinor field around a loop, so the algebra anomaly and the geometry of spinor transport are two faces of one object. The construction extends to the $\mathcal{N}=1$ Wess-Zumino model, where four flux operators—supertranslation, superrotation, superduality, and supersymmetry—form an algebra; notably, the commutator of two superfluxes produces both the expected energy flux and a helicity flux. With constant test functions the algebra reduces to the super-BMS (supersymmetric Bondi-Metzner-Sachs) and super-Poincaré algebras, and in the latter the global helicity flux acts on supercharges exactly as an R-symmetry generator. The paper also constrains test functions by demanding elimination of non-local terms and satisfaction of Jacobi identities, which forces supertranslation parameters to be at most quadratic in retarded time.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the canonical boundary quantization of the radiative modes $F$ and $G$, with the anticommutators $\{F(u,\Omega),\bar F(u',\Omega')\} = \frac12 \delta(u-u')\delta(\Omega-\Omega')$ and no non-local step-function term $\alpha(u-u')$; this absence is what keeps the fermionic flux algebra free of non-local operators. From these modes the paper builds the smeared flux operators $T_f$, $M_Y$, $O_h$ and, in the Wess-Zumino case, $Q_\eta$, $\bar Q_{\bar\eta}$, and computes their commutators. The second piece of machinery is the one-parameter family of spinor Lie derivatives $L_\xi\Psi = \xi^\mu\nabla_\mu\Psi - \frac14 \nabla_{[\mu}\xi_{\nu]}\gamma^\mu\gamma^\nu\Psi + \alpha\nabla_\mu\xi^\mu\Psi$; matching boundary commutators fixes $\alpha = 1/4$, and the failure of $L_{\xi_1}L_{\xi_2} - L_{\xi_2}L_{\xi_1}$ to equal $L_{[\xi_1,\xi_2]}$ on spinors produces the anomaly that becomes the helicity flux. The Jacobi-identity analysis then constrains the test functions and fixes the central charges $C_T$, $C_O$, and $C_Q$.

What would settle it

Compute the one-loop correction to the boundary anticommutator $\{F(u,\Omega),\bar F(u',\Omega')\}$ in the massless Wess-Zumino model with Yukawa coupling $g$; if a non-local term proportional to $\theta(u'-u)-\theta(u-u')$ or any $g$-dependent deformation appears, the proposed algebra is not the full quantum result, whereas a vanishing correction supports the paper's free-field input.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that the quantum flux algebra of the massless Dirac theory at future null infinity is a fermionic intertwined Carrollian diffeomorphism—the boundary symmetry algebra generated by supertranslation and superrotation fluxes—with a chiral anomaly. If $T_f$ is the supertranslation flux, $M_Y$ the superrotation flux, and $O_h$ the helicity flux, then $$[M_Y, M_Z] = iM_{[Y,Z]} - \frac{i}{2} O_{o(Y,Z)},$$ so the superrotation generators close only after adding the local helicity flux operator $O_{o(Y,Z)}$. This operator matches the boundary reduction of the non-closure of spinor Lie transport around a loop, $A(\xi_Y,\xi_Z) = -\frac{i}{2} o(Y,Z)\gamma^5\Psi^{(1)}$ at leading order, and the mixed supertranslation-superrotation anomalies vanish. In the Wess-Zumino extension, the supercharge fluxes satisfy $$[Q_{\eta_1},\bar Q_{\bar\eta_2}] = C_Q(\eta_1,\bar\eta_2) - T_{\eta_1\bar\eta_2} - \frac{i}{2} O_{\dot\eta_1\bar\eta_2 + \dot{\bar\eta}_2\eta_1},$$ so the helicity flux also emerges from the supercharge commutator. When all test functions are constant, the algebra reduces to the super-BMS and super-Poincaré algebras; the global helicity flux obeys $[H,Q_a] = -Q_a$ and commutes with the Poincaré generators, the defining action of an R-symmetry generator, and a unified $R$ flux that includes the complex-scalar charge flux is constructed.

Load-bearing premise

The boundary radiative modes $F$ and $G$ are treated as free fields whose canonical anticommutation relations receive no corrections from bulk interactions; if the Yukawa or other couplings modify these boundary anticommutators, the flux algebra and central charges would change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

In the Dirac theory, the superrotation subalgebra is not closed: the commutator of two superrotation fluxes generates a local chiral helicity flux that must be included in the symmetry algebra.
Because fermionic anticommutators contain no non-local $\alpha(u-u')$ term, the helicity flux test function $h$ may remain time-dependent, and the fermionic algebra carries two central charges, $C_T$ and $C_O$, unlike the bosonic version.
Requiring Jacobi identities fixes the admissible test functions: supertranslation parameters at most quadratic in $u$, helicity parameters time-independent, and supercharge parameters linear in $u$ in the Wess-Zumino model.
In the Wess-Zumino model, the commutator of two superfluxes produces both the supertranslation generator and a helicity flux operator, so the helicity flux is not only a superrotation anomaly but also a supercharge commutator anomaly.
With constant parameters, the flux algebra reduces to the super-BMS and super-Poincaré algebras; the global helicity flux acts like an R-symmetry generator on supercharges, and together with the complex-scalar charge flux it forms the $R$ flux.

Reading between the lines

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

Beyond the paper: the free-field boundary anticommutator is the fragile input; a one-loop computation of $\{F,\bar F\}$ in the Yukawa-coupled Wess-Zumino model would reveal whether interactions generate non-local corrections that alter the central charges.
Beyond the paper: the paper notes the integrated chiral anomaly but does not derive the spinor/Maxwell helicity balance from Feynman rules; deriving it in massless QED would turn the balance equation into a testable statement about soft photon and fermion scattering.
Beyond the paper: the appearance of the helicity flux in the supercharge commutator, together with the time-dependent $h$ allowed by fermionic anticommutators, suggests analogous constructions for higher-spin fermionic fields and for supergravity boundary algebras, where a similar non-closure may force new flux operators.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The paper does a real job: it builds quantum flux operators for the massless Dirac field at null infinity, shows a helicity flux operator must appear in the superrotation commutator, and extends the whole story to the N=1 Wess-Zumino model, where a helicity flux also shows up in the superflux commutator and reduces to an R-symmetry generator in the super-Poincaré limit. Those are genuine new results in the Carrollian flux program, not just a repeat of the scalar/vector/gravity cases. The derivations are explicit and checkable: mode expansions, anticommutators, and the flux algebra are all presented with enough detail that you can verify the signs and coefficients. The connection between the helicity flux and the non-closure of the Lie transport of a spinor around a loop is a nice conceptual point, and the WZ section is substantial, not a footnote.

Now the soft spots. The stress-test note is right: the unconstrained algebra (2.94) violates Jacobi. A nonzero c-number Jacobiator is incompatible with the claim that these are genuine commutators of operators on a common domain. The paper acknowledges this and calls (2.94) an "almost Lie algebra," but that label does not resolve the inconsistency—it just names it. The constrained subalgebras they then define do satisfy Jacobi, and the core physical results (helicity flux in [M,M], and the [Q,Qbar] commutator in the WZ model) survive those constraints. So the flaw is not fatal to the main claims, but the paper should present the constrained algebra as the actual result and treat (2.94) as a formal intermediate. As written, the presentation risks overstating what is realized by actual operators. The divergent central charges (δ^2(0)) are also left unregularized, and the free-field assumption for the boundary modes in the interacting WZ model is unchecked. The α=1/4 choice in the spinor Lie derivative is forced by matching, which is fine, but its geometric meaning is left unexplored.

Who is this for? People working on Carrollian holography, asymptotic symmetries, and celestial CFT will find it useful and will want to engage with the details. It deserves a serious referee: the construction is nontrivial, the literature connection is real, and the super-Poincaré reduction with the helicity flux as R-symmetry is an interesting observation. But a referee should push on the Jacobi resolution and the central-charge regularization before accepting the advertised algebra as the final word. I would send it to review, expecting major revision rather than acceptance as is.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper constructs quantum flux operators for the massless Dirac theory at future null infinity and for the four-dimensional Wess-Zumino model. In the Dirac case, the commutator of two superrotation generators is shown to produce a helicity flux operator in addition to the expected superrotation term, and this operator is related to the non-closure of the Lie transport of a spinor around a loop. The authors then discuss the full flux algebra, its central terms, and the restrictions on test functions needed to satisfy the Jacobi identities, obtaining several subalgebras including the standard BMS-type and super-BMS algebras. In the Wess-Zumino extension, four types of flux operators appear, the commutator of superfluxes produces both energy and helicity flux, and the reduction to the super-Poincaré algebra is shown to generate an R-symmetry-like action.

Significance. If the technical issues below are resolved, the paper would be a useful contribution to Carrollian holography and asymptotic symmetry: it provides the fermionic counterpart of the intertwined Carrollian diffeomorphism, identifies a helicity flux operator with a clear geometric origin in the non-closure of spinor Lie transport, and extends the construction to supersymmetry with explicit central charges and reductions to known algebras. The computations are largely self-contained, with detailed mode expansions, twistor identities, and commutator evaluations that allow the reader to check the algebraic steps. The paper also honestly reports the Jacobi-identity violation of the unconstrained algebra, which is an important consistency issue that the final version must address explicitly.

major comments (3)

[§2.6, Eqs. (2.94)–(2.96)] The paper presents (2.94) as the commutator algebra of the flux operators (2.51), but then computes nonzero Jacobiators (2.96) with c-number coefficients proportional to c = δ^(2)(0). For genuine operator commutators on a common dense domain, the Jacobi identity is an identity, so a nonzero c-number Jacobiator means either that the brackets in (2.94) are not the actual commutators of the operators defined in (2.51), or that no common dense domain exists for these operators. Calling (2.94) an 'almost Lie algebra' in Section 4 does not resolve this inconsistency. Since the abstract and Section 2.6 advertise (2.94) as the flux algebra, the manuscript should state unambiguously that only the constrained subalgebras, e.g. (2.102), (2.110), or (2.111), are claimed to be realized by the operators, and that (2.94) is a formal bracket whose consistency conditions are being studied. The same issue applies to the Wess-Zumino algebra (3.57) with the Jacobiators (3.59).
[§3.2, Eqs. (3.41)–(3.42) and (3.57)] The Wess-Zumino model (3.1) contains a Yukawa coupling and a Φ^4 self-interaction with coupling g, but the flux algebra (3.57) is computed from the free-field equal-time algebra (3.41)–(3.42) for the boundary fields Σ and F. The paper does not justify that the interacting boundary fields satisfy these free-field relations at future null infinity. If interactions generate corrections to these boundary commutators or anticommutators, the central charges (3.58) and the superalgebra (3.57) would be modified. The authors should either state explicitly that they are using the free asymptotic data and that interactions are treated as subleading in r, or demonstrate that the g-dependent terms in (3.21)–(3.23) do not alter the leading boundary commutators.
[§2.6, Eqs. (2.88)–(2.93)] The 'full' algebra (2.88) is presented before the restriction Ẏ = 0, but the operators in (2.51) define M_Y only for Y^A(Ω) independent of u. Equation (2.88b) contains M_{f Ẏ^A}, which would require a time-dependent Y not covered by the definition. In addition, the central charge C_M in (2.91b) involves Λ^{AB'}(Ω,Ω') containing products of δ(Ω−Ω') and its derivatives, which is not a well-defined distribution. These issues motivate the later restriction Ẏ = 0, but as written (2.88) is not an algebra of the operators defined earlier. The status of (2.88) and of C_M should be clarified explicitly.

minor comments (4)

[§2.6, Eq. (2.88b)] The notation C_TM(f,Y) is introduced in (2.88b), but the central-charge list (2.91) does not define it; if this term vanishes identically, that should be stated explicitly.
[§2.5, Eq. (2.118)] The symbol '˙=' in (2.118) is not defined; please explain in the text that it denotes the extraction of the O(r^{-1}) term.
[§3.3, Eqs. (3.57)–(3.60)] The same bracket symbol [ , ] is used for graded commutators throughout Section 3; for the supercharge sector this is potentially confusing because [Q,Q̄] in (3.57g) is an anticommutator. Consider using { , } consistently for the graded bracket.
[§2.5, Eqs. (2.62)–(2.74)] The matching condition α=1/4 is central to the supertranslation comparison, but the discussion is brief; a short remark explaining why this differs from the Kosmann (α=0) and Penrose-Rindler conventions would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the flux algebra is computed from canonical anticommutators rather than assumed; minor self-citations are not load-bearing.

full rationale

The derivation is self-contained. The flux densities in (2.50) come from the stress tensor and axial current, and the smeared operators (2.51) include the helicity-flux term in M_Y only because the boundary commutator (2.60c) must match the bulk Lie-derivative variation (2.76a); that matching fixes α=1/4 and is not an assumed output. The key result [M_Y,M_Z]=iM_[Y,Z]-(i/2)O_{o(Y,Z)} follows by direct evaluation using the canonical anticommutators (2.44) and the identity (2.89b), not by imposing the result. The central charges are computed, not fitted. The reductions to super-BMS and super-Poincaré algebras are checks with explicitly chosen parameters, and the R-symmetry statement is a consequence of [O_{h=1},Q_{λ_a}]=-Q_{λ_a}. The paper explicitly acknowledges the Jacobi-identity violations and labels (2.94) an 'almost Lie algebra'; that is an internal consistency caveat, not circularity. Self-citations to the authors' earlier Carrollian framework and to the c-regularization discussion [48] are not load-bearing: the c=0 possibility is set aside, but the main algebra, the helicity-flux term, and the constrained subalgebras are derived in this paper. The use of free-field boundary anticommutators in the Wess-Zumino model is an unverified assumption, with the paper deferring interaction corrections to future work; this is a correctness gap rather than circular reasoning. Score 2 reflects only the presence of minor, non-load-bearing self-citations and the framework borrowed from the authors' previous papers.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper does not introduce new particles or forces. The main structural free parameter is α, chosen to match boundary and bulk variations. The boundary anticommutation relations and the fixed twistor frame are domain assumptions inherited from the free-field reduction; they are standard in this literature but are not proven from first principles.

free parameters (1)

α (Lie derivative parameter) = 1/4
In Section 2.5, the one-parameter family of spinor Lie derivatives L_ξΨ includes a free parameter α. Matching the bulk variation δ_f F with the boundary commutator [T_f, F] forces α = 1/4. This is a hand-picked value required to make the holographic dictionary work, though it is a single parameter and not fitted to data.

assumptions (3)

domain assumption The boundary radiative modes F, G satisfy free-field anticommutation relations (2.44) with no non-local terms.
This is assumed from the mode expansion of the free Dirac field and is used to compute all flux commutators. The validity in the presence of interactions is not checked.
domain assumption The spin connection vanishes in the chosen vielbein (2.69), making the covariant derivative of the spinor field equal to the partial derivative.
This is stated in Section 2.5 and underlies all Lie derivative computations. It is a gauge choice that should be valid for flat spacetime, but it is not explicitly justified for the asymptotic reduction.
domain assumption The invariant spinor metric ϵ is Lie-derived to zero, which is motivated by the fixed twistors (2.82).
This condition (2.80) is used to derive the variation of the conjugate field and to rule out the alternative Lie derivative (2.84). It is a modeling choice: the twistors are fixed, but one could imagine a different spinor frame.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum flux operators in the fermionic theory and their supersymmetric extension." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LM3DMYAI

@misc{pith2026241220829,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum flux operators in the fermionic theory and their supersymmetric extension},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LM3DMYAI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.20829}
}

abstract

We construct quantum flux operators with respect to the Poincar\'e symmetry in the massless Dirac theory at future null infinity. An anomalous helicity flux operator emerges from the commutator of the superrotation generators. The helicity flux operator corresponds to the local chiral symmetry which is the analog of superduality in the gauge theories. We also find its relation to the non-closure of the Lie transport of the spinor field around a loop. We discuss various algebras formed by these operators and constrain the test functions by the requirement of eliminating the non-local terms and satisfying the Jacobi identities. Furthermore, we explore their $\mathcal{N}=1$ supersymmetric extension in the Wess-Zumino model. There are four kinds of quantum flux operators, which correspond to the supertranslation, superrotation, superduality and supersymmetry, respectively. Interestingly, besides the expected supertranslation generator, a helicity flux operator will also emerge in the commutator between the superflux operators. We check that our flux algebra can give rise to the super-BMS and super-Poincar\'e algebras with appropriate choice of parameters. In the latter reduction, we find the helicity flux reduces to behaving like a $R$ symmetry generator in the commutator with the superflux. For completion, we derive the $R$ flux which also includes a charge flux for complex scalar besides the helicity flux for spinor field.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.20829 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** In the left figure, a vector field is invariant under Lie transport around a loop. However, as shown in the right figure, a spinor field usually changes under Lie transport around the same loop. which is the difference between numbers of particles and antiparticles, while (2.59) is the difference between numbers of particles with opposite helicities. One can add this operator into the algebra (2.94) [Tf , Ee] = Efe… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** The triangle relation among the helicity flux operators of the Dirac field and the Maxwell field as well as the topological Chern character. In figure 2, we summarize the previous discussion as a triangle relation. It would be interesting to explore the relation among chiral anomaly, helicity flux operator and topological term in the future. • Carrollian supergeometry. In a concrete approach [82], one can equip the… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

Covariant variation and its applications
hep-th 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

A metric-compatible covariant variation of tensors has a non-closure anomaly that reproduces electromagnetic helicity flux under superrotations and generalizes to higher-spin and p-form radiative data.
Constraining bulk-to-boundary correlators under Poincar\'e symmetry
hep-th 2026-01 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Poincaré symmetry plus null-infinity fall-off conditions force scalar bulk-to-boundary correlators to 1/(u+n·x)^Δ and fermionic ones to a sum of 1/(u+n·x)^Δ and /n/(u+n·x)^(Δ+1) branches.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

92 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

[1]

Une nouvelle limite non-relativiste du groupe de Poincar´ e,

J. M. L´ evy-Leblond, “Une nouvelle limite non-relativiste du groupe de Poincar´ e,”Ann. Inst. H Poincar´ e3 (1965), no. 1, 1–12

1965
[2]

On an analogue of the galilei group,

N. Gupta, “On an analogue of the galilei group,” Nuovo Cimento Della Societa Italiana Di Fisica A-nuclei Particles and Fields 44 (1966) 512–517

1966
[3]

Conformal carroll groups and BMS symmetry,

C. Duval, G. W. Gibbons, and P. A. Horvathy, “Conformal carroll groups and BMS symmetry,” Classical and Quantum Gravity 31 (apr, 2014) 092001

2014
[4]

Conformal carroll groups,

C. Duval, G. W. Gibbons, and P. A. Horvathy, “Conformal carroll groups,” Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 47 (aug, 2014) 335204

2014
[5]

Carroll versus Newton and Galilei: two dual non-Einsteinian concepts of time,

C. Duval, G. W. Gibbons, P. A. Horvathy, and P. M. Zhang, “Carroll versus Newton and Galilei: two dual non-Einsteinian concepts of time,” Class. Quant. Grav. 31 (2014) 085016, 1402.0657

arXiv 2014
[6]

Carroll Structures, Null Geometry and Conformal Isometries,

L. Ciambelli, R. G. Leigh, C. Marteau, and P. M. Petropoulos, “Carroll Structures, Null Geometry and Conformal Isometries,” Phys. Rev. D 100 (2019), no. 4, 046010, 1905.02221

arXiv 2019
[7]

Symmetry group at future null infinity: Scalar theory,

W.-B. Liu and J. Long, “Symmetry group at future null infinity: Scalar theory,” Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023), no. 12, 126002, 2210.00516

arXiv 2023
[8]

Gravitational waves in general relativity. 7. Waves from axisymmetric isolated systems,

H. Bondi, M. G. J. van der Burg, and A. W. K. Metzner, “Gravitational waves in general relativity. 7. Waves from axisymmetric isolated systems,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 269 (1962) 21–52

1962

Show all 92 references

[9]

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

R. K. Sachs, “Gravitational waves in general relativity. 8. Waves in asymptotically flat space-times,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 270 (1962) 103–126. 42

1962
[10]

Symmetries of asymptotically flat 4 dimensional spacetimes at null infinity revisited,

G. Barnich and C. Troessaert, “Symmetries of asymptotically flat 4 dimensional spacetimes at null infinity revisited,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 105 (2010) 111103, 0909.2617

2010 arXiv
[11]

Aspects of the BMS/CFT correspondence,

G. Barnich and C. Troessaert, “Aspects of the BMS/CFT correspondence,” JHEP 05 (2010) 062, 1001.1541

2010 arXiv
[12]

Asymptotic symmetries and subleading soft graviton theorem,

M. Campiglia and A. Laddha, “Asymptotic symmetries and subleading soft graviton theorem,” Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014), no. 12, 124028, 1408.2228

2014 arXiv
[13]

New symmetries for the Gravitational S-matrix,

M. Campiglia and A. Laddha, “New symmetries for the Gravitational S-matrix,” JHEP 04 (2015) 076, 1502.02318

2015 arXiv
[14]

The Weyl BMS group and Einstein’s equations,

L. Freidel, R. Oliveri, D. Pranzetti, and S. Speziale, “The Weyl BMS group and Einstein’s equations,” JHEP 07 (2021) 170, 2104.05793

2021 arXiv
[15]

Symmetry group at future null infinity II: Vector theory,

W.-B. Liu and J. Long, “Symmetry group at future null infinity II: Vector theory,” JHEP 07 (2023) 152, 2304.08347

2023 arXiv
[16]

Symmetry group at future null infinity III: Gravitational theory,

W.-B. Liu and J. Long, “Symmetry group at future null infinity III: Gravitational theory,” JHEP 10 (2023) 117, 2307.01068

2023 arXiv
[17]

Quantum flux operators in higher spin theories,

W.-B. Liu, J. Long, and X.-H. Zhou, “Quantum flux operators in higher spin theories,” Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024), no. 8, 086012, 2311.11361

2024 arXiv
[18]

The quantum theory of the electron,

P.A.M.Dirac, “The quantum theory of the electron,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 133 (1931) 60

1931
[19]

Duality Transformations of Abelian and Nonabelian Gauge Fields,

S. Deser and C. Teitelboim, “Duality Transformations of Abelian and Nonabelian Gauge Fields,” Phys. Rev. D 13 (1976) 1592–1597

1976
[20]

Duality in linearized gravity,

M. Henneaux and C. Teitelboim, “Duality in linearized gravity,” Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 024018, gr-qc/0408101

2005 arXiv
[21]

On the definition of Carrollian amplitudes in general dimensions,

W.-B. Liu, J. Long, H.-Y. Xiao, and J.-L. Yang, “On the definition of Carrollian amplitudes in general dimensions,” JHEP 11 (2024) 027, 2407.20816

2024 arXiv
[22]

Precession Caused by Gravitational Waves,

A. Seraj and B. Oblak, “Precession Caused by Gravitational Waves,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 129 (2022), no. 6, 061101, 2203.16216

2022 arXiv
[23]

Gravitational helicity flux density from two-body systems,

J. Dong, J. Long, and R.-Z. Yu, “Gravitational helicity flux density from two-body systems,” 2403.18627

arXiv
[24]

Gyroscopic Gravitational Memory from quasi-circular binary systems,

G. Faye and A. Seraj, “Gyroscopic Gravitational Memory from quasi-circular binary systems,” 2409.02624. 43

arXiv
[25]

Electromagnetic helicity flux operators in higher dimensions,

W.-B. Liu, J. Long, and X.-H. Zhou, “Electromagnetic helicity flux operators in higher dimensions,” 2407.20077

arXiv
[26]

Axial vector vertex in spinor electrodynamics,

S. L. Adler, “Axial vector vertex in spinor electrodynamics,” Phys. Rev. 177 (1969) 2426–2438

1969
[27]

A PCAC puzzle: π0 → γγ in the σ model,

J. S. Bell and R. Jackiw, “A PCAC puzzle: π0 → γγ in the σ model,” Nuovo Cim. A 60 (1969) 47–61

1969
[28]

CONFORMAL SUPERGRA VITY, TWISTORS AND THE SUPER BMS GROUP,

M. A. Awada, G. W. Gibbons, and W. T. Shaw, “CONFORMAL SUPERGRA VITY, TWISTORS AND THE SUPER BMS GROUP,” Annals Phys. 171 (1986) 52

1986
[29]

Infinite-dimensional fermionic symmetry in supersymmetric gauge theories,

T. T. Dumitrescu, T. He, P. Mitra, and A. Strominger, “Infinite-dimensional fermionic symmetry in supersymmetric gauge theories,” JHEP 08 (2021) 051, 1511.07429

2021 arXiv
[30]

Residual Local Supersymmetry and the Soft Gravitino,

S. G. Avery and B. U. W. Schwab, “Residual Local Supersymmetry and the Soft Gravitino,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016), no. 17, 171601, 1512.02657

2016 arXiv
[31]

Asymptotic realization of the super-BMS algebra at spatial infinity,

M. Henneaux, J. Matulich, and T. Neogi, “Asymptotic realization of the super-BMS algebra at spatial infinity,” Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020), no. 12, 126016, 2004.07299

2020 arXiv
[32]

Local supersymmetry and the square roots of Bondi-Metzner-Sachs supertranslations,

O. Fuentealba, M. Henneaux, S. Majumdar, J. Matulich, and T. Neogi, “Local supersymmetry and the square roots of Bondi-Metzner-Sachs supertranslations,” Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021), no. 12, L121702, 2108.07825

2021 arXiv
[33]

Extended Super BMS Algebra of Celestial CFT,

A. Fotopoulos, S. Stieberger, T. R. Taylor, and B. Zhu, “Extended Super BMS Algebra of Celestial CFT,” JHEP 09 (2020) 198, 2007.03785

2020 arXiv
[34]

Novel supersymmetric extension of BMS symmetries at null infinity,

K. Prabhu, “Novel supersymmetric extension of BMS symmetries at null infinity,” Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022), no. 6, 064054, 2112.07186

2022 arXiv
[35]

Supersymmetrization of deformed BMS algebras,

N. Banerjee, A. Mitra, D. Mukherjee, and H. R. Safari, “Supersymmetrization of deformed BMS algebras,” Eur. Phys. J. C 83 (2023), no. 1, 3, 2201.09853

2023 arXiv
[36]

Asymptotic symmetry algebra of N=8 supergravity,

N. Banerjee, T. Rahnuma, and R. K. Singh, “Asymptotic symmetry algebra of N=8 supergravity,” Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024), no. 4, 046010, 2212.12133

2024 arXiv
[37]

Carrollian Perspective on Celestial Holography,

L. Donnay, A. Fiorucci, Y. Herfray, and R. Ruzziconi, “Carrollian Perspective on Celestial Holography,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 129 (2022), no. 7, 071602, 2202.04702

2022 arXiv
[38]

Scattering Amplitudes: Celestial and Carrollian,

A. Bagchi, S. Banerjee, R. Basu, and S. Dutta, “Scattering Amplitudes: Celestial and Carrollian,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 128 (2022), no. 24, 241601, 2202.08438

2022 arXiv
[39]

Holographic dictionary from bulk reduction,

W.-B. Liu and J. Long, “Holographic dictionary from bulk reduction,” Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024), no. 6, L061901, 2401.11223. 44

2024 arXiv
[40]

Srednicki, Quantum Field Theory

M. Srednicki, Quantum Field Theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2007

2007
[41]

D´ eriv´ ees de lie des spineurs,

Y. Kosmann, “D´ eriv´ ees de lie des spineurs,”Annali di Matematica Pura ed Applicata 91 (1971) 317–395

1971
[42]

Penrose and W

R. Penrose and W. Rindler, SPINORS AND SPACE-TIME. VOL. 2: SPINOR AND TWISTOR METHODS IN SPACE-TIME GEOMETRY . Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics. Cambridge University Press, 4, 1988

1988
[43]

The graded algebra and the derivative of spinor fields related to the twistor equation,

K. Habermann, “The graded algebra and the derivative of spinor fields related to the twistor equation,” Journal of Geometry and Physics 18 (1996) 131–146

1996
[44]

The Lie derivative of spinor fields: Theory and applications,

M. Godina and P. Matteucci, “The Lie derivative of spinor fields: Theory and applications,” Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. 2 (2005) 159–188

2005
[45]

Concept of Lie Derivative of Spinor Fields A Geometric Motivated Approach,

R. F. Le˜ ao, W. A. Rodrigues, and S. A. Wainer, “Concept of Lie Derivative of Spinor Fields A Geometric Motivated Approach,” Adv. Appl. Clifford Algebras 27 (2017), no. 1, 209–227. [Erratum: Adv.Appl.Clifford Algebras 27, 229–230 (2017)]

2017
[46]

Reductive G structures and Lie derivatives,

M. Godina and P. Matteucci, “Reductive G structures and Lie derivatives,” J. Geom. Phys. 47 (2003) 66–86, math/0201235

2003 arXiv
[47]

Spinor Lie derivatives and Fermion stress–energies,

A. D. Helfer, “Spinor Lie derivatives and Fermion stress–energies,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 472 (2016), no. 2186, 20150757, 1602.00632

2016 arXiv
[48]

Quantum flux operators for Carrollian diffeomorphism in general dimensions,

A. Li, W.-B. Liu, J. Long, and R.-Z. Yu, “Quantum flux operators for Carrollian diffeomorphism in general dimensions,” JHEP 11 (2023) 140, 2309.16572

2023 arXiv
[49]

Conserved charges of the extended Bondi-Metzner-Sachs algebra,

E. E. Flanagan and D. A. Nichols, “Conserved charges of the extended Bondi-Metzner-Sachs algebra,” Phys. Rev. D 95 (2017), no. 4, 044002, 1510.03386. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 108, 069902 (2023)]

2017 arXiv
[50]

A new class of lie algebras,

R. V. Moody, “A new class of lie algebras,” Journal of Algebra 10 (1968) 211–230

1968
[51]

Simple Irreducible Graded Lie Algebras of Finite Growth,

V. G. Kac, “Simple Irreducible Graded Lie Algebras of Finite Growth,” Izvestiya: Mathematics 2 (Dec., 1968) 1271–1311

1968
[52]

I. M. Benn and R. W. Tucker, AN INTRODUCTION TO SPINORS AND GEOMETRY WITH APPLICATIONS IN PHYSICS . 1987

1987
[53]

A Geometric definition of Lie derivative for spinor fields,

L. Fatibene, M. Ferraris, M. Francaviglia, and M. Godina, “A Geometric definition of Lie derivative for spinor fields,” in 6th International Conference on Differential Geometry and Applications. 8, 1996. gr-qc/9608003

1996 arXiv
[54]

General theory of Lie derivatives for Lorentz tensors,

L. Fatibene and M. Francaviglia, “General theory of Lie derivatives for Lorentz tensors,” arXiv e-prints (Apr., 2009) arXiv:0904.0258, 0904.0258. 45

2009 arXiv
[55]

Supergauge Transformations in Four-Dimensions,

J. Wess and B. Zumino, “Supergauge Transformations in Four-Dimensions,” Nucl. Phys. B 70 (1974) 39–50

1974
[56]

A Supersymmetry primer,

S. P. Martin, “A Supersymmetry primer,” Adv. Ser. Direct. High Energy Phys. 18 (1998) 1–98, hep-ph/9709356

1998 arXiv
[57]

D. Z. Freedman and A. Van Proeyen, Supergravity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 5, 2012

2012
[58]

Supersymmetric Theory and Models,

H. E. Haber and L. Stephenson Haskins, “Supersymmetric Theory and Models,” in Theoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics: Anticipating the Next Discoveries in Particle Physics , pp. 355–499. WSP, 2018. 1712.05926

2018 arXiv
[59]

Shifman, Advanced topics in quantum field theory.: A lecture course

M. Shifman, Advanced topics in quantum field theory.: A lecture course . Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK, 2, 2012

2012
[60]

Necessity of additional unitary-antisymmetric q-number terms in the commutators of spatial current components,

F. Buccella, G. Veneziano, R. Gatto, and S. Okubo, “Necessity of additional unitary-antisymmetric q-number terms in the commutators of spatial current components,” Phys. Rev. 149 (Sep, 1966) 1268–1272

1966
[61]

Current algebras in a simple model,

K. Johnson and F. E. Low, “Current algebras in a simple model,” Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 37 (1966) 74–93

1966
[62]

Approach to Equal-Time Commutators in Quantum Field Theory,

R. A. Brandt, “Approach to Equal-Time Commutators in Quantum Field Theory,” Phys. Rev. 166 (1968) 1795–1821

1968
[63]

Magnetic charge quantization and angular momentum,

H. J. Lipkin, W. I. Weisberger, and M. Peshkin, “Magnetic charge quantization and angular momentum,” Annals Phys. 53 (1969) 203–214

1969
[64]

3 - Cocycle in Mathematics and Physics,

R. Jackiw, “3 - Cocycle in Mathematics and Physics,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 54 (1985) 159–162

1985
[65]

Commutators in an Anomalous Nonabelian Chiral Gauge Theory,

S. G. Jo, “Commutators in an Anomalous Nonabelian Chiral Gauge Theory,” Phys. Lett. B 163 (1985) 353–359

1985
[66]

The Failure of the Jacobi Identity for Free Fermionic Currents and Its Relation to the Axial Anomaly,

D. Levy, “The Failure of the Jacobi Identity for Free Fermionic Currents and Its Relation to the Axial Anomaly,” Nucl. Phys. B 282 (1987) 367–381

1987
[67]

On the Violation of the Jacobi Identity in the Algebra of Fermionic Currents,

R. Banerjee, H. J. Rothe, and K. D. Rothe, “On the Violation of the Jacobi Identity in the Algebra of Fermionic Currents,” Mod. Phys. Lett. A 5 (1990) 1103–1108

1990
[68]

Deformed w1+∞ Algebras in the Celestial CFT,

J. Mago, L. Ren, A. Y. Srikant, and A. Volovich, “Deformed w1+∞ Algebras in the Celestial CFT,” SIGMA 19 (2023) 044, 2111.11356

2023 arXiv
[69]

On effective field theories with celestial duals,

L. Ren, M. Spradlin, A. Yelleshpur Srikant, and A. Volovich, “On effective field theories with celestial duals,” JHEP 08 (2022) 251, 2206.08322. 46

2022 arXiv
[70]

Currents in Celestial CFT,

A. Ball, “Currents in Celestial CFT,” 2407.13558

arXiv
[71]

Geometric models for noncommutative algebras,

A. C. Silva and A. J. Weinstein, “Geometric models for noncommutative algebras,” 1999

1999
[72]

q deformation of the Virasoro algebra with central extension,

N. Aizawa and H.-T. Sato, “q deformation of the Virasoro algebra with central extension,” Phys. Lett. B 256 (1991) 185–190

1991
[73]

q-Witt Algebras, q-Virasoro algebra, q-Lie Algebras, q-Holomorph Structure and Representations,

N. Hu, “q-Witt Algebras, q-Virasoro algebra, q-Lie Algebras, q-Holomorph Structure and Representations,” arXiv Mathematics e-prints (Dec., 2005) math/0512526, math/0512526

2005 arXiv
[74]

Deformations of lie algebras using σ-derivations,

J. T. Hartwig, D. Larsson, and S. D. Silvestrov, “Deformations of lie algebras using σ-derivations,” Journal of Algebra 295 (Jan., 2006) 314–361, math/0408064

2006 arXiv
[75]

Introduction to SH Lie algebras for physicists,

T. Lada and J. Stasheff, “Introduction to SH Lie algebras for physicists,” Int. J. Theor. Phys. 32 (1993) 1087–1104, hep-th/9209099

1993 arXiv
[76]

The lie algebra structure of tangent cohomology and deformation theory,

M. Schlessinger and J. Stasheff, “The lie algebra structure of tangent cohomology and deformation theory,” Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra 38 (1985) 313–322

1985
[77]

Differential graded lie algebras, quasi-hopf algebras and higher homotopy algebras,

J. Stasheff, “Differential graded lie algebras, quasi-hopf algebras and higher homotopy algebras,” in Quantum Groups, P. P. Kulish, ed., pp. 120–137. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1992

1992
[78]

Analytic loops,

A. Malcev, “Analytic loops,” Mat. Sb. 78 (1955) 569–578

1955
[79]

Malcev algebras,

A. A. Sagle, “Malcev algebras,” Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 101 (1961) 426–458

1961
[80]

H. B. LA WSON and M.-L. MICHELSOHN, Spin Geometry and the Dirac Operators , pp. 77–165. Princeton University Press, 1989

1989
[81]

Nakahara, Geometry, topology and physics

M. Nakahara, Geometry, topology and physics . Institute of Physics Publishing, London, UK, 2003

2003
[82]

Rogers, Supermanifolds: Theory and Applications

A. Rogers, Supermanifolds: Theory and Applications . World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd, Singapore, 04, 2007

2007
[83]

B. S. DeWitt, Supermanifolds. Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK, 5, 2012

2012
[84]

Bridging Carrollian and celestial holography,

L. Donnay, A. Fiorucci, Y. Herfray, and R. Ruzziconi, “Bridging Carrollian and celestial holography,” Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023), no. 12, 126027, 2212.12553

2023 arXiv
[85]

An embedding space approach to Carrollian CFT correlators for flat space holography,

J. Salzer, “An embedding space approach to Carrollian CFT correlators for flat space holography,” JHEP 10 (2023) 084, 2304.08292. 47

2023 arXiv
[86]

Carrollian conformal correlators and massless scattering amplitudes,

K. Nguyen, “Carrollian conformal correlators and massless scattering amplitudes,” JHEP 01 (2024) 076, 2311.09869

2024 arXiv
[87]

Carrollian Amplitudes and Celestial Symmetries,

L. Mason, R. Ruzziconi, and A. Yelleshpur Srikant, “Carrollian Amplitudes and Celestial Symmetries,” 2312.10138

arXiv
[88]

Feynman rules and loop structure of Carrollian amplitudes,

W.-B. Liu, J. Long, and X.-Q. Ye, “Feynman rules and loop structure of Carrollian amplitudes,” JHEP 05 (2024) 213, 2402.04120

2024 arXiv
[89]

Eikonal amplitudes on the celestial sphere,

T. Adamo, W. Bu, P. Tourkine, and B. Zhu, “Eikonal amplitudes on the celestial sphere,” 2405.15594

arXiv
[90]

Carrollian Amplitudes from Holographic Correlators,

L. F. Alday, M. Nocchi, R. Ruzziconi, and A. Yelleshpur Srikant, “Carrollian Amplitudes from Holographic Correlators,” 2406.19343

arXiv
[91]

Differential Equations for Carrollian Amplitudes,

R. Ruzziconi, S. Stieberger, T. R. Taylor, and B. Zhu, “Differential Equations for Carrollian Amplitudes,” 2407.04789

arXiv
[92]

Carrollian propagator and amplitude in Rindler spacetime,

A. Li, J. Long, and J.-L. Yang, “Carrollian propagator and amplitude in Rindler spacetime,” 2410.20372. 48

arXiv

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

Une nouvelle limite non-relativiste du groupe de Poincar´ e,

J. M. L´ evy-Leblond, “Une nouvelle limite non-relativiste du groupe de Poincar´ e,”Ann. Inst. H Poincar´ e3 (1965), no. 1, 1–12

1965

[2] [2]

On an analogue of the galilei group,

N. Gupta, “On an analogue of the galilei group,” Nuovo Cimento Della Societa Italiana Di Fisica A-nuclei Particles and Fields 44 (1966) 512–517

1966

[3] [3]

Conformal carroll groups and BMS symmetry,

C. Duval, G. W. Gibbons, and P. A. Horvathy, “Conformal carroll groups and BMS symmetry,” Classical and Quantum Gravity 31 (apr, 2014) 092001

2014

[4] [4]

Conformal carroll groups,

C. Duval, G. W. Gibbons, and P. A. Horvathy, “Conformal carroll groups,” Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 47 (aug, 2014) 335204

2014

[5] [5]

Carroll versus Newton and Galilei: two dual non-Einsteinian concepts of time,

C. Duval, G. W. Gibbons, P. A. Horvathy, and P. M. Zhang, “Carroll versus Newton and Galilei: two dual non-Einsteinian concepts of time,” Class. Quant. Grav. 31 (2014) 085016, 1402.0657

arXiv 2014

[6] [6]

Carroll Structures, Null Geometry and Conformal Isometries,

L. Ciambelli, R. G. Leigh, C. Marteau, and P. M. Petropoulos, “Carroll Structures, Null Geometry and Conformal Isometries,” Phys. Rev. D 100 (2019), no. 4, 046010, 1905.02221

arXiv 2019

[7] [7]

Symmetry group at future null infinity: Scalar theory,

W.-B. Liu and J. Long, “Symmetry group at future null infinity: Scalar theory,” Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023), no. 12, 126002, 2210.00516

arXiv 2023

[8] [8]

Gravitational waves in general relativity. 7. Waves from axisymmetric isolated systems,

H. Bondi, M. G. J. van der Burg, and A. W. K. Metzner, “Gravitational waves in general relativity. 7. Waves from axisymmetric isolated systems,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 269 (1962) 21–52

1962