Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

On the deep string spectrum

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that the deep string spectrum is fully organized by Howe duality: every state at depth δ>0 is a dressed depth-0 state, so solving the Virasoro constraints once produces an entire trajectory.

desk verdict An honest and readable proceedings review of the author's own published technology; the completeness claim is real but deferred to [1,2], which is fine for a review but not for a standalone research paper. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.00177 v2 pith:NHZFNFDK submitted 2025-04-30 hep-th

Chrysoula Markou This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-th MSC 81T3017B1081T40
keywords stringspectrumHowedualityVirasoroconstraintssymplecticalgebraorthosymplecticReggetrajectoriesdepthparameterhigher-spinstates
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

These proceedings review a technology for constructing physical string states far beyond the leading Regge trajectory, and claim that the whole deep spectrum has a manageable structure. The key claim is that the string spectrum splits into depth-zero trajectories, whose polynomials are known, and infinitely many clones at higher depth, obtained by dressing the depth-zero polynomials with raising operators of a hidden symplectic algebra and imposing the Virasoro constraints. Solving the constraints only once yields every member of an infinite trajectory, with coefficients expressed as functions of spin and spacetime dimension. The same mechanism is extended to the open superstring, where the hidden algebra is orthosymplectic and the Ramond sector acquires extra structure from zero-energy generators. A sympathetic reader would care because this replaces a level-by-level computation that grows harder without bound with a single finite solve per depth.

What carries the argument

The central object is Howe duality between the symplectic algebra sp(2N), generated by oscillator bilinears such as α_{-r}·α_s, and the spacetime little-group algebra. Its role is to identify the depth-0 physical trajectories with the lowest weight states of sp and to guarantee that every other state in the same Lorentz irrep is reachable by acting with the sp raising operators. In the superstring the machinery is the orthosymplectic algebra osp(2N|2M) (or osp(2N+1|2M) in the Ramond sector), whose lowering operators impose the Young symmetry, tracelessness, and the nested-hook gluing of rows and columns; depth is defined as δ = N − N_min, the excess level over the minimal embedding of a given Young diagram.

What would settle it

Fix a Young diagram and a depth δ, then compare the number of independent physical states from the partition-function character (or from a level-by-level old-covariant solve) with the number of independent solutions of the Virasoro constraints on the dressing Ansatz (43) or its superstring analogue. A mismatch—solutions that are null states, or physical states not reached by any dressing—would falsify the claim that solving once yields the entire trajectory; a concrete starting point is level 6 of the open bosonic string, where the spectrum contains two massive spin-2 states, so the dressing Ansatz for the one-row diagram at depth 4 must reproduce exactly that multiplicity after removing null states.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In the open bosonic string, the Virasoro constraints that define physical states are linear combinations of the lowering operators of a symplectic algebra sp(2N) acting on oscillator modes, together with Cartan generators that set the mass level. This algebra commutes with the spacetime Lorentz algebra, and Howe duality maps each Lorentz irreducible representation to a unique sp irreducible representation. The lowest weight states of sp are exactly the depth-0 trajectories—states whose Young diagram appears at its minimal possible level, contracted with oscillators of distinct mode numbers. Every later appearance, at depth δ>0, is then a clone obtained by acting on a depth-0 polynomial with a function of the sp raising operators carrying δ units of energy; the Virasoro constraints select the physical subset of such dressings. Solving those constraints once fixes the coefficients for the whole infinite trajectory, since the coefficients depend on the row lengths of the diagram. In the superstring, the same construction uses orthosymplectic algebras osp(2N|2M) in the Neveu-Schwarz sector and osp(2N+1|2M) in the Ramond sector; the Ramond sector's zero-energy osp generators create a genuine multiplicity of solutions even at depth zero, matching the partition-function counting.

Load-bearing premise

The construction assumes that every physical state at depth greater than zero is exactly of the dressed form—a function of the symplectic or orthosymplectic raising operators applied to a depth-zero state—with no missing states and no multiplicities beyond those counted by solving the Virasoro constraints; the paper asserts this completeness but grounds the proof in the earlier works rather than proving it here.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • An entire trajectory at fixed depth—infinitely many states—is obtained by solving the Virasoro constraints once; the solution yields the coefficients for every spin in that trajectory.
  • The spectrum is reorganized by depth and Young-diagram row count rather than by level, revealing a cloned, branching structure where each trajectory has infinitely many clones, some truncated.
  • The technology supplies scattering data for deep trajectories: a generalized Koba-Nielsen factor for any bosonic trajectory and explicit 3-point amplitudes at depth zero and beyond.
  • For the superstring, the construction works before and after the GSO projection, and the Ramond sector's zero-energy osp generators explain why some tensor-spinors appear with multiplicity 2^{r}−1 at their first appearance.
  • Physical state polynomials encode interactions, so having closed-form polynomials for deep trajectories opens the way to computing amplitudes and decay rates for highly excited, subleading-Regge states.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the dressing completeness is right, the hardest part of the spectrum is concentrated in the finite depth-0 data; a recursive solution in depth would in principle reach the entire string spectrum, a step the paper names as its next challenge.
  • One could test whether the sp/osp action organizes amplitudes as well as states: if dressing commutes with correlation functions in the expected way, 3-point amplitudes of clones should be expressible through differential operators acting on depth-0 amplitudes, generalizing the paper's Koba-Nielsen factor.
  • The Ramond-sector diagonal ambiguity suggests that in settings where bosonic and fermionic oscillators share a mode number—for example tensionless or curved-background limits—similar zero-energy generators may create new multiplicities, which would be a sharper signature of the Howe-dual structure.
  • A natural extension is the closed string, where left- and right-moving copies of the same construction would have to be combined; if the dressing form survives, the deep closed-string spectrum would become accessible at the same one-solve-per-depth cost.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. These proceedings are a review, based on the author's invited talk, of the published work [1,2] on a new method for constructing physical string states at arbitrary depth in the open string spectrum. After recalling the traditional level-by-level covariant construction, the paper introduces the depth δ of a state as the excess of its mass level over the minimal level at which its Young diagram can first appear, and defines δ=0 trajectories by the simple polynomials (22). The key structural observation is that the Virasoro constraints can be rewritten as linear combinations of the generators of a symplectic algebra sp(2N) built from oscillator bilinears (eqs. (29)-(33) and (41)-(42)). The δ=0 trajectories are then identified as lowest-weight states of this sp algebra, and Howe duality with the spacetime little-group algebra is invoked to claim that every δ>0 physical state is a clone obtained by dressing a δ=0 state with sp raising operators, as in the ansatz (43). This is illustrated for the δ=2 clone of the leading Regge trajectory, with explicit coefficients in (45)-(46). The last section sketches the extension to the RNS superstring, where the relevant Howe dual is an orthosymplectic algebra, and discusses the differences between the NS and R sectors, including the R-sector multiplicity 2^{k}-1 at δ=0. The paper is explicitly a review: the proofs of the main structural claims are deferred to [1,2].

Significance. If the completeness claim is correct, this is a genuinely useful reorganizing principle for the string spectrum: it replaces level-by-level solution of the Virasoro constraints by a single solution per trajectory, and it exhibits a hidden sp/osp structure behind the physical-state conditions. The manuscript is pedagogical and contains checkable algebraic material: the commutation relations (30)-(33), the rewriting of the Virasoro constraints in (41)-(42), and the explicit δ=2 example with coefficients in (45)-(46). Its main limitation is that the load-bearing statement — that every physical state is either a depth-0 state or an sp-raising clone of one — is supported only by a loose Howe-duality argument and by references to [1,2], while the transverse-subspace simplification (26) is also asserted without proof. For a proceedings review this degree of deferral is understandable, but the manuscript should make the exact status of each claim explicit so that the reader can distinguish the Ansatz from the proven theorem.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 3, Eqs. (41)-(43)] The central claim that the spectrum 'splits into two parts' — depth-0 trajectories and their clones — rests on the assertion that every physical state at δ>0 has the form (43), with a dressing function built from sp raising operators acting on a δ=0 lowest-weight state. The text supports this by a loose statement of Howe duality and by references to [1,2], but it does not state the precise Fock-space decomposition for sp(2N) × so(D-1), nor does it prove that the Virasoro constraints select exactly the states reachable by the dressing. Since (43) is an Ansatz that becomes a completeness theorem only if every Virasoro-satisfying state at depth δ lies in the sp module generated from a depth-0 lowest-weight state (with no multiplicities and no missing sectors), this issue is load-bearing. Please state the precise theorem, including the role of the transverse-subspace restriction (26), and give the specific propositions in [1,2] that establish it; alternatively, label the completeness claim explicitly as a result proved in [1,2] rather than as a consequence derived in these proceedings.
  2. [Section 3, Eq. (26)] The transverse-subspace simplification is invoked to construct the entire spectrum, with the sentence 'the full proof is equally possible without this restriction' but no argument or reference. All equations from (27) onward, including the explicit example (46), are written in this transverse subspace, so the claim that the method covers the full covariant spectrum depends on an equivalence that is not demonstrated here. Please either give the precise statement and a citation to the proof in [1] or explicitly limit the claims in these proceedings to the transverse-subspace version.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 4, before Eq. (63)] 'The leading Regge trajectories are highlighted in red in table 3' should refer to table 4, which is the superstring spectrum table.
  2. [Section 3 and Abstract] The phrase 'the spacetime Lorentz algebra so(D-1,1), of the little group of which all physical string states are irreducible representations' is imprecise: massive states are irreps of so(D-1) and massless states of so(D-2). Please rephrase to avoid confusion.
  3. [Section 3, Eqs. (29), (34)-(35)] The three families of sp generators are typeset very similarly (J_{kℓ}, J^{kℓ}, and the barred operator), which makes the raising/lowering assignments hard to follow. A short table listing the generators, their energy, and their root type would significantly improve readability.
  4. [Around Eq. (45)] The text says the coefficients depend on 'a free parameter, namely the spin s'; more precisely, the overall normalization δ1 is also an arbitrary (unphysical) parameter, and s is the row length of the Young diagram. Please clarify the counting of parameters.
  5. [Eq. (46)] The coefficients 12, -116, 87 are quoted without derivation; please add a one-sentence indication of how (44)-(45) produce these numbers, or cite the corresponding equation in [1].

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the dressing construction is derived from explicit oscillator algebra and external Howe duality, and the clone states are solved, not fitted.

full rationale

The paper's central claim—that the Virasoro constraints are linear combinations of sp(2N) lowering operators and that the δ>0 spectrum consists of sp-raising dressings of δ=0 lowest-weight states—is argued from the explicit oscillator algebra (29)–(33) and from Howe duality, which is cited to the external mathematical literature [24,25] rather than to the author's own prior work. The identification of the lowest-weight states with the 'simplest' δ=0 polynomials (22) is demonstrated on the hook example (37)–(40) and stated for general diagrams; this is a mathematical equivalence, not a definition of the conclusion. The dressing Ansatz (43) is then solved for the δ=2 clone of the leading Regge trajectory (44)–(46), yielding coefficients by imposing the Virasoro constraints; the coefficients are not fitted to the states they are meant to predict. The R-sector multiplicity 2^{r-1} obtained from the Ansatz (88) is explicitly checked against the independent partition-function computation of [18]. The main gap is that the full proof that every physical state at δ>0 has the form (43) is deferred to [1,2], and the transverse-subspace simplification (26) is used with the unrestricted proof deferred; but these are omissions of detail in a proceedings review, not circular reductions. No equation in the paper reduces to its own input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central construction uses standard string theory background, including the Virasoro algebra, the no-ghost theorem, and critical dimensions, plus a standard representation-theory result, Howe duality. The only genuinely new element is the specific identification of Virasoro constraints with sp/osp lowering operators and the dressing Ansatz, which is a theorem or construction from the author's earlier papers [1,2]. The paper introduces no free parameters fitted to data; depth and clones are bookkeeping terms.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The no-ghost theorem: in the critical dimensions D=26 (bosonic) and D=10 (superstring), the covariant open string spectrum is ghost-free and equivalent to the transverse spectrum.
    Invoked in Section 2 and footnote 1 to justify that physical states are transverse-traceless little-group irreps.
  • domain assumption The transverse subspace simplification (26) is sufficient to reconstruct all physical string states.
    Used in Section 3 to rewrite the Virasoro constraints as sp lowering operators; the paper says the full proof is possible without this restriction but does not provide it.
  • standard math Howe duality applies to the dual pair (sp(2N), so(D-1)) in the oscillator Fock space of the string, giving a bijection between the Lorentz and sp irreps that appear in the Fock space.
    Cites [24,25]; the application to string oscillators is a physics assumption that the Fock space is a multiplicity-free module over the dual pair.
  • domain assumption The GSO projection and critical dimension yield spacetime supersymmetry in the ten-dimensional superstring.
    Used in Section 4 to organize NS and R spectra into supersymmetric multiplets; standard result cited to [12,28].
invented entities (1)
  • depth (δ)
    purpose: Labels the level difference between a physical state and the first (minimal-level) appearance of its Young diagram; used to organize the spectrum into trajectories.
    A combinatorial bookkeeping parameter introduced in Section 3 around eq. (25). It is not a physical object and has no independent falsifiable handle; it is a convenient label for parametrizing the construction.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On the deep string spectrum." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NHZFNFDK

@misc{pith2026250500177,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On the deep string spectrum},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NHZFNFDK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.00177}
}
read the original abstract

These proceedings are based on the author's invited talk reviewing the original published work [1,2] of the author with collaborators. The subject matter is a new, covariant and efficient technology of constructing entire trajectories of physical string states deeper inside the string spectrum than the leading Regge. The key observation behind the technology is that the lowering operators of a symplectic algebra appear in the Virasoro constraints which impose physicality of states in the open bosonic string. This algebra commutes with the spacetime Lorentz algebra, (of the little group) of which all string states are irreducible representations. Employing then the so-called Howe duality of representation theory, one may relate the irreducible representations of the two algebras via a bijection. The spectrum thus splits into two parts: trajectories that are lowest weight states of the symplectic algebra and their infinitely many clones. The latter can then be reached by suitably dressing the former with the raising operators of the symplectic algebra. The technology is nontrivially extended to the open superstring, where the relevant Howe dual is an orthosymplectic algebra.

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

  1. Higher-Spin and Higher-Point Constraints on Stringy Amplitudes

    hep-th 2026-03 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Factorization at the second excited mass level forces the Regge intercept to the bosonic string value, and large-level multipositivity bounds forbid the simplest Gross satellite deformation of four-point superstring a...

  2. Non-supersymmetric strings on AdS$_3$: a world-sheet perspective

    hep-th 2025-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    On AdS3×S3×S3×S1, a Wilson-line deformation of the Spin(16)×Spin(16)⋊Z2 heterotic string produces a level-matched tachyon, so the classical moduli space contains unstable regions.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    An excursion into the string spectrum,

    C. Markou and E. Skvortsov, “An excursion into the string spectrum,” JHEP 12 (2023), 055 [arXiv:2309.15988 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2023

  2. [2]

    On the deep superstring spectru m,

    T. Basile and C. Markou, “On the deep superstring spectru m,” JHEP 07 (2024), 184 [arXiv:2405.18467 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2024

  3. [3]

    Covariant Quantization of String B ased on BRS Invariance,

    M. Kato and K. Ogawa, “Covariant Quantization of String B ased on BRS Invariance,” Nucl. Phys. B 212 (1983), 443-460

    work page 1983

  4. [4]

    Covariant Quantization of the String in Dimen sions D <= 26 Using a BRS Formulation,

    S. Hwang, “Covariant Quantization of the String in Dimen sions D <= 26 Using a BRS Formulation,” Phys. Rev. D 28 (1983), 2614

    work page 1983

  5. [5]

    A Simple Constructio n of String Vertex Operators,

    J. L. Manes and M. A. H. Vozmediano, “A Simple Constructio n of String Vertex Operators,” Nucl. Phys. B 326 (1989), 271-284

    work page 1989

  6. [6]

    SUPERSTRING THE ORY . VOL. 1: INTRO- DUCTION,

    M. B. Green, J. H. Schwarz and E. Witten, “SUPERSTRING THE ORY . VOL. 1: INTRO- DUCTION,” 1988

    work page 1988

  7. [7]

    String theory. Vol. 1: An introduction t o the bosonic string,

    J. Polchinski, “String theory. Vol. 1: An introduction t o the bosonic string,” Cambridge University Press, 2007

    work page 2007

  8. [8]

    Basic concepts o f string theory,

    R. Blumenhagen, D. Lüst and S. Theisen, “Basic concepts o f string theory,” Springer, 2013

    work page 2013

Show all 57 references
  1. [9]

    Characterization of th e physical states in dual-resonance models,

    E. Del Giudice and P. Di Vecchia, “Characterization of th e physical states in dual-resonance models,” Nuovo Cim. A 70 (1970), 579-591

    1970

  2. [10]

    Algebraic treatment of sub sidiary conditions in dual resonance models,

    S. Fubini and G. Veneziano, “Algebraic treatment of sub sidiary conditions in dual resonance models,” Annals Phys. 63 (1971), 12-27

    1971

  3. [11]

    Vertex Operators for a Bosonic String,

    R. Sasaki and I. Y amanaka, “Vertex Operators for a Bosonic String,” Phys. Lett. B 165 (1985), 283-288

    1985

  4. [12]

    Conformal invariance, supersymmetry and string theory,

    D. Friedan, E. J. Martinec and S. H. Shenker, “Conformal invariance, supersymmetry and string theory,” Nucl. Phys. B 271 (1986), 93-165 23 On the deep string spectrum Chrysoula Markou

    1986

  5. [13]

    String Lessons for Higher- Spin Interactions,

    A. Sagnotti and M. Taronna, “String Lessons for Higher- Spin Interactions,” Nucl. Phys. B 842 (2011), 299-361 [arXiv:1006.5242 [hep-th]]

    2011 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Quan tum dynamics of a massless relativistic string,

    P. Goddard, J. Goldstone, C. Rebbi and C. B. Thorn, “Quan tum dynamics of a massless relativistic string,” Nucl. Phys. B 56 (1973), 109-135

    1973

  7. [15]

    General properties of the dual resonance model,

    E. Del Giudice, P. Di Vecchia and S. Fubini, “General properties of the dual resonance model,” Annals Phys. 70 (1972), 378-398

    1972

  8. [16]

    Symmetry Patterns in th e Mass Spectra of Dual String Models,

    T. L. Curtright and C. B. Thorn, “Symmetry Patterns in th e Mass Spectra of Dual String Models,” Nucl. Phys. B 274 (1986), 520-558

    1986

  9. [17]

    Spin Cont ent of the Bosonic String,

    T. L. Curtright, C. B. Thorn and J. Goldstone, “Spin Cont ent of the Bosonic String,” Phys. Lett. B 175 (1986), 47-52

    1986

  10. [18]

    The Covariant per turbative string spectrum,

    A. Hanany, D. Forcella and J. Troost, “The Covariant per turbative string spectrum,” Nucl. Phys. B 846 (2011), 212-225 [arXiv:1007.2622 [hep-th]]

    2011 arXiv

  11. [19]

    The unitary representati ons of the Poincaré group in any spacetime dimension,

    X. Bekaert and N. Boulanger, “The unitary representati ons of the Poincaré group in any spacetime dimension,” SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes 30 (2021), 1 [arXiv:hep-th/0611263 [hep- th]]

    2021 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Elements of Vasiliev Theory,

    V . E. Didenko and E. D. Skvortsov, “Elements of Vasiliev Theory,” Lect. Notes Phys. 1028 (2024), 269-456 [arXiv:1401.2975 [hep-th]]

    2024 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Coupling Constants and Vertex Functions in String Theories,

    S. Weinberg, “Coupling Constants and Vertex Functions in String Theories,” Phys. Lett. B 156 (1985), 309-314

    1985

  14. [22]

    An Introduction to the Theory of Dual Models and Strings,

    J. Scherk, “An Introduction to the Theory of Dual Models and Strings,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 47 (1975), 123-164 doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.47.123

    1975 doi

  15. [23]

    Remarks on the Cohomology of the BRS Opera tor in String Theory,

    M. Henneaux, “Remarks on the Cohomology of the BRS Opera tor in String Theory,” Phys. Lett. B 177 (1986), 35-38

    1986

  16. [24]

    Remarks on classical invariant theory,

    R. Howe, “Remarks on classical invariant theory,” Transactions of the American Mathematical Society 313 no. 2, (1989) 539–570

    1989

  17. [25]

    Transcending Classical Invariant Theory,

    R. Howe, “Transcending Classical Invariant Theory,” J . Am. Math. Soc. 2 (1989) 535

    1989

  18. [26]

    Dual pairing of s ymmetry groups and dynamical groups in physics,

    D. J. Rowe, M. J. Carvalho and J. Repka, “Dual pairing of s ymmetry groups and dynamical groups in physics,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 84 (2012), 711-757 [arXiv:1207.0148 [nucl-th]]

    2012 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Dual Pa ir Correspondence in Physics: Oscillator Realizations and Representations,

    T. Basile, E. Joung, K. Mkrtchyan and M. Mojaza, “Dual Pa ir Correspondence in Physics: Oscillator Realizations and Representations,” JHEP 09 (2020), 020 [arXiv:2006.07102 [hep- th]]

    2020 arXiv

  20. [28]

    A Locally Supersy mmetric and Reparametrization Invariant Action for the Spinning String,

    L. Brink, P. Di Vecchia and P. S. Howe, “A Locally Supersy mmetric and Reparametrization Invariant Action for the Spinning String,” Phys. Lett. B 65 (1976), 471-474 24 On the deep string spectrum Chrysoula Markou

    1976

  21. [29]

    String theory. Vol. 2: Superstring the ory and beyond,

    J. Polchinski, “String theory. Vol. 2: Superstring the ory and beyond,” Cambridge University Press, 2007,

    2007

  22. [30]

    Covariant Highe r Spin Vertex Operators in the Ramond Sector,

    I. G. Koh, W . Troost and A. Van Proeyen, “Covariant Highe r Spin Vertex Operators in the Ramond Sector,” Nucl. Phys. B 292 (1987), 201-221

    1987

  23. [31]

    Direct Production of Lightest Regge Resonances,

    W . Z. Feng, D. Lust, O. Schlotterer, S. Stieberger and T. R. Taylor, “Direct Production of Lightest Regge Resonances,” Nucl. Phys. B 843 (2011), 570-601 [arXiv:1007.5254 [hep-th]]

    2011 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Higher Spin Scattering in Superstrin g Theory,

    O. Schlotterer, “Higher Spin Scattering in Superstrin g Theory,” Nucl. Phys. B 849 (2011), 433-460 [arXiv:1011.1235 [hep-th]]

    2011 arXiv

  25. [33]

    A str ingy massive double copy,

    D. Lüst, C. Markou, P. Mazloumi and S. Stieberger, “A str ingy massive double copy,” JHEP 08 (2023), 193 [arXiv:2301.07110 [hep-th]]

    2023 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Resummation o f Massive Gravity,

    C. de Rham, G. Gabadadze and A. J. Tolley, “Resummation o f Massive Gravity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 106 (2011), 231101 [arXiv:1011.1232 [hep-th]]

    2011 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Bimetric Gravity from Ghos t-free Massive Gravity,

    S. F. Hassan and R. A. Rosen, “Bimetric Gravity from Ghos t-free Massive Gravity,” JHEP 02 (2012), 126 [arXiv:1109.3515 [hep-th]]

    2012 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Confirmation of the Seconda ry Constraint and Absence of Ghost in Massive Gravity and Bimetric Gravity,

    S. F. Hassan and R. A. Rosen, “Confirmation of the Seconda ry Constraint and Absence of Ghost in Massive Gravity and Bimetric Gravity,” JHEP 04 (2012), 123 [arXiv:1111.2070 [hep-th]]

    2012 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Extr acting bigravity from string theory,

    D. Lüst, C. Markou, P. Mazloumi and S. Stieberger, “Extr acting bigravity from string theory,” JHEP 12 (2021), 220 [arXiv:2106.04614 [hep-th]]

    2021 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Scattering of Spinning Black Holes from Exponentiated Soft Factors,

    A. Guevara, A. Ochirov and J. Vines, “Scattering of Spinning Black Holes from Exponentiated Soft Factors,” JHEP 09 (2019), 056 [arXiv:1812.06895 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Observables and a mplitudes for spinning particles and black holes,

    B. Maybee, D. O’Connell and J. Vines, “Observables and a mplitudes for spinning particles and black holes,” JHEP 12 (2019), 156 [arXiv:1906.09260 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Kerr Black Holes From Massive Higher-Spin Gauge Symmetry,

    L. Cangemi, M. Chiodaroli, H. Johansson, A. Ochirov, P. Pichini and E. Skvortsov, “Kerr Black Holes From Massive Higher-Spin Gauge Symmetry,” Phys . Rev. Lett. 131 (2023) no.22, 221401 [arXiv:2212.06120 [hep-th]]

    2023 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Classical limit of higher-s pin string amplitudes,

    L. Cangemi and P. Pichini, “Classical limit of higher-s pin string amplitudes,” JHEP 06 (2023), 167 [arXiv:2207.03947 [hep-th]]

    2023 arXiv

  34. [42]

    D-brane approach to bl ack hole quantum mechanics,

    C. G. Callan and J. M. Maldacena, “D-brane approach to bl ack hole quantum mechanics,” Nucl. Phys. B 472 (1996), 591-610 [arXiv:hep-th/9602043 [hep-th]]

    1996 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Absorption versus de cay of black holes in string theory and T symmetry,

    A. Dhar, G. Mandal and S. R. Wadia, “Absorption versus de cay of black holes in string theory and T symmetry,” Phys. Lett. B 388 (1996), 51-59 [arXiv:hep-th/9605234 [hep-th]]

    1996 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Comparing decay rates for bla ck holes and D-branes,

    S. R. Das and S. D. Mathur, “Comparing decay rates for bla ck holes and D-branes,” Nucl. Phys. B 478 (1996), 561-576 [arXiv:hep-th/9606185 [hep-th]]. 25 On the deep string spectrum Chrysoula Markou

    1996 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Black hole grey body factors and d-brane spectroscopy,

    J. M. Maldacena and A. Strominger, “Black hole grey body factors and d-brane spectroscopy,” Phys. Rev. D 55 (1997), 861-870 [arXiv:hep-th/9609026 [hep-th]]

    1997 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Scattering of strings from D-branes,

    A. Hashimoto and I. R. Klebanov, “Scattering of strings from D-branes,” Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. 55 (1997), 118-133 [arXiv:hep-th/9611214 [hep-th]]

    1997 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Probing Fuzzb alls with Particles, Waves and Strings,

    M. Bianchi, D. Consoli and J. F. Morales, “Probing Fuzzb alls with Particles, Waves and Strings,” JHEP 06 (2018), 157 [arXiv:1711.10287 [hep-th]]

    2018 arXiv

  40. [48]

    The dark side of fuzzball geometries,

    M. Bianchi, D. Consoli, A. Grillo and J. F. Morales, “The dark side of fuzzball geometries,” JHEP 05 (2019), 126 [arXiv:1811.02397 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Chaotic scattering of hig hly excited strings,

    D. J. Gross and V . Rosenhaus, “Chaotic scattering of hig hly excited strings,” JHEP 05 (2021), 048 [arXiv:2103.15301 [hep-th]]

    2021 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Measure for Chaotic Scattering Amplitudes,

    M. Bianchi, M. Firrotta, J. Sonnenschein and D. Weissma n, “Measure for Chaotic Scattering Amplitudes,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 129 (2022) no.26, 261601 [arXiv:2207.13112 [hep-th]]

    2022 arXiv

  43. [51]

    The bosonic string spectrum and the explic it states up to level 10 from the lightcone and the chaotic behavior of certain string amplit udes,

    I. Pesando, “The bosonic string spectrum and the explic it states up to level 10 from the lightcone and the chaotic behavior of certain string amplit udes,” Eur. Phys. J. C 85 (2025) no.4, 371 [arXiv:2405.09987 [hep-th]]

    2025 arXiv

  44. [52]

    On stringy A dS(5) x S**5 and higher spin holography,

    M. Bianchi, J. F. Morales and H. Samtleben, “On stringy A dS(5) x S**5 and higher spin holography,” JHEP 07 (2003), 062 [arXiv:hep-th/0305052 [hep-th]]

    2003 arXiv

  45. [53]

    On the spectrum of AdS / CFT beyond supergravity,

    N. Beisert, M. Bianchi, J. F. Morales and H. Samtleben, “ On the spectrum of AdS / CFT beyond supergravity,” JHEP 02 (2004), 001 [arXiv:hep-th/0310292 [hep-th]]

    2004 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Higher spin symmetry and N=4 SYM,

    N. Beisert, M. Bianchi, J. F. Morales and H. Samtleben, “ Higher spin symmetry and N=4 SYM,” JHEP 07 (2004), 058 [arXiv:hep-th/0405057 [hep-th]]

    2004 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Tensionless string s pectra on AdS 3,

    M. R. Gaberdiel and R. Gopakumar, “Tensionless string s pectra on AdS 3,” JHEP 05 (2018), 085 [arXiv:1803.04423 [hep-th]]

    2018 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Stringy gravity, interacting tensionless strings and massless higher spins,

    B. Sundborg, “Stringy gravity, interacting tensionless strings and massless higher spins,” Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. 102 (2001), 113-119 [arXiv:hep-th/0103247 [hep-th]]

    2001 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Higher-Spin Interactions: four-point fu nctions and beyond,

    M. Taronna, “Higher-Spin Interactions: four-point fu nctions and beyond,” JHEP 04 (2012), 029 [arXiv:1107.5843 [hep-th]]. 26

    2012 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.