Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

Dressing Factors and Mirror Thermodynamic Bethe Ansatz for mixed-flux AdS3/CFT2

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper completes the massless dressing factors of the mixed-flux AdS3 × S3 × T4 worldsheet S-matrix by taking the massless limit of the massive dressing factors and adopting a semionic sign in the massless crossing equation, then…

desk verdict A solid, honest paper completing the massless dressing-factor construction, with the load-bearing semionic-statistics assumption clearly flagged; worth a real referee, though the TBA contours and the sign should be probed. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.12191 v1 pith:LTKCTT7D submitted 2025-07-16 hep-th

Sergey Frolov , Davide Polvara , Alessandro Sfondrini This is my paper
classification hep-th MSC 81R1281T30
keywords mixed-fluxAdS3dressingfactorsmasslessexcitationssemionicstatisticscrossingsymmetrymirrorTBAS3/CFT2integrableS-matrix
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper claims to complete the worldsheet S-matrix of the AdS3 × S3 × T4 superstring with mixed Ramond–Ramond and Neveu–Schwarz–Neveu–Schwarz flux by fixing the dressing factors that govern the scattering of massless excitations, in both the string and the mirror kinematics. This matters because the massless sector was the last undetermined piece: with the dressing factors in hand, the entire S-matrix is fixed by symmetry, and the mirror thermodynamic Bethe ansatz (TBA) proposed in the paper becomes a concrete computational framework for the finite-volume spectrum at any string tension, interpolating between the pure-RR and pure-NSNS limits. The central move is a sign flip in the massless-massless crossing equation, forced by the assumption that massless particles obey semionic exchange relations, so that exchanging two of them multiplies the state by a factor of ±i instead of ±1. The resulting factors are claimed to pass all known consistency checks: braiding unitarity, parity, CT invariance in the mirror, CP in the string kinematics, the tree-level near-BMN expansions, the relativistic bootstrap, and the pure-RR limit.

What carries the argument

The construction is carried by the massless limit of the massive dressing factors, expressed in Zhukovsky variables $x^{\pm}_{a}(u)$ defined by the deformed map $u_a(x)=x+1/x-(\kappa_a/\pi)\ln x$, with the dressing phase split into BES, HL and ‘odd’ pieces built from ratios of Barnes G-functions $R(\gamma)$. The load-bearing identity is the sign-modified crossing equation (3.16), whose minus sign comes from the assumed semionic exchange relations. The massless HL phase is re-expressed in the closed form of eq. (4.20) as a product of four $R(\gamma)$ factors, which removes the equal-rapidity ambiguity and yields $S^{00}_{\chi\chi}(p,p)=-1$. The string-region S-matrix elements are obtained by analytic continuation along two distinct paths, giving positive- and negative-momentum branches, and these continuations also produce the relations connecting massless particles to $k$-particle bound states that are used in the CP checks and in the mirror TBA.

What would settle it

A direct derivation of the two-particle exchange relations for massless modes from the light-cone gauge-fixed Hamiltonian of the mixed-flux theory would settle the crucial $\pm i$ factor and the sign of the crossing equation (3.16). Short of that, an independent quantum spectral curve (QSC) construction of the massless dressing factors, or a two-loop perturbative computation of massless-massless scattering (the present tree-level checks are insensitive to the semionic $i$, which the conjectured $s_{ij}=1/4$ conversion of eq. (5.23) removes by hand), would test whether the proposed analytic structure is the correct one.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the massless dressing factors of the mixed-flux AdS3 × S3 × T4 S-matrix are obtained as the $m\to 0^+$ limit of the massive dressing factors, and that they satisfy the sign-modified crossing equation $$$S^{{00}}$_{\chi\chi}(u_1,u_2)\,$S^{{00}}$_{\chi\chi}(\bar u_1,u_2)=-\frac{\tilde $x^{{-0}}$_{L2}}{\tilde $x^{{+0}}$_{L2}}\left(\frac{\tilde $x^{{+0}}$_{L1}-\tilde $x^{{+0}}$_{L2}}{\tilde $x^{{+0}}$_{L1}-\tilde $x^{{-0}}$_{L2}}\right)^{2},$$ where the minus sign relative to earlier work reflects semionic statistics for massless particles. With this sign, the massless factor satisfies $S^{00}_{\chi\chi}(p,p)=-1$ without introducing unwanted zeros, the massless Hernandez-Lopez (HL) phase admits a closed Barnes-function form, and the elements (4.11), (4.15), (4.26), (4.30) and (4.34) pass all discrete-symmetry checks, including CP in the string kinematics, and reproduce the tree-level near-BMN results, the relativistic bootstrap of the massless sector, and the pure-RR limit. On this basis the paper proposes the mirror TBA equations of section 6.3, including the massless $Y_0$-function, as the spectral equations of the model for any value of the RR/NSNS flux.

Load-bearing premise

The construction rests on the unproven premise that exchanging two massless particles multiplies the quantum state by a factor of $i$ (semionic statistics) rather than the usual $\pm1$, which flips a sign in the massless-massless crossing equation; if that premise is wrong, the massless dressing factor, the normalization $S^{00}_{\chi\chi}(p,p)=-1$, and the agreement with perturbation theory all have to be reconsidered.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The mixed-flux AdS3 × S3 × T4 worldsheet S-matrix is now fully fixed: no undetermined dressing factors remain, and multi-particle amplitudes follow by factorization together with the Yang–Baxter equation.
  • The mirror TBA equations (6.15)–(6.19) provide a concrete spectral framework whose solution gives the finite-volume ground-state energy for any string tension, interpolating between the pure-RR ($k=0$) and pure-NSNS ($h=0$) limits.
  • The massless normalization $S^{00}_{\chi\chi}(p,p)=-1$ guarantees a regular Bethe wave function, meaning no two massless particles can sit at the same momentum.
  • The near-BMN expansions reproduce the tree-level perturbative results of [8] and [22] only after converting the ZF S-matrix to the physical one with the conjectured $s_{ij}=1/4$ exchange parameter for massless pairs, directly tying the semionic statistics to the comparison.
  • The pure-RR and relativistic limits agree with previous results modulo the CDD-like factor $a(\gamma)$, which the new sign renders unnecessary; removing it eliminates a zero in the physical strip.
  • If the semionic sign survives independent confirmation, earlier pure-RR massless dressing factors built with the opposite crossing sign carry a removable CDD factor $a(\gamma)$, so Y-system and excited-state TBA constructions based on them would need revision.
  • The sign in eq. (3.16) could be settled without a full QSC by a two-loop perturbative computation of massless-massless scattering: tree-level checks are insensitive to the semionic $i$, which the conjectured conversion (5.23) strips off by hand, but the analytic structure at higher loops is not.
  • The same semionic mechanism is likely to enter other integrable string backgrounds with massless sectors, in particular AdS3 × S3 × S3 × S1, whose crossing equations would need the same sign modification.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper constructs dressing factors for scattering amplitudes involving massless excitations in the mixed-flux AdS3 x S3 x T4 worldsheet S matrix, in both mirror and string kinematics, and uses them to propose mirror Thermodynamic Bethe Ansatz (TBA) equations. The construction is based on taking massless limits of the massive dressing factors of the authors' prior work [17], combined with an assumed semionic exchange relation for massless particles, which changes the sign of the massless-massless crossing equation relative to earlier treatments [10,25]. The resulting S-matrix elements are checked against discrete symmetries, braiding and physical unitarity, crossing, the near-BMN expansion, a relativistic limit, and the pure-RR limit. The TBA equations are formulated in analogy with the pure-RR case, with the important caveat that the integration contours are not fully determined.

Significance. If the semionic exchange assumption and the conjectured conversion phase s_ij are correct, the paper completes a central part of the AdS3/CFT2 integrability program: the massless dressing factors are the last undetermined pieces of the mixed-flux worldsheet S matrix, and the TBA equations would provide a concrete framework for finite-volume spectral computations. The paper contains many explicit and detailed analytic calculations, and it is a genuine strength that the proposal is confronted with several external checks: tree-level perturbation theory in mirror and string kinematics, the relativistic bootstrap of [11], and the pure-RR limit of [25]. The authors are also transparent about some limitations, such as the unresolved TBA contours. The main weakness is that the distinguishing sign in the massless-massless crossing equation is assumed rather than derived, and one of the near-BMN comparisons relies on a conjectured phase in eq. (5.23).

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.3, eq. (3.16)] The semionic exchange relation for massless particles is assumed, not derived: the text states, "we will assume that massless particles have semionic statistics, i.e. that exchanging any two massless particles produces a factor of +/- i." This minus sign in eq. (3.16) is the defining feature of the massless dressing factor; eqs. (4.15), (4.23), the normalization S00_chi_chi(p,p) = -1, and the pure-RR comparison in section 5.8 all depend on it. The supporting evidence, namely the absence of an SU(2)-compatible solution of the opposite-sign equation and the QSC suggestion from [28], is indirect. Since the abstract claims a "complete derivation" of the dressing factors, the authors should either derive the exchange relations from the worldsheet model or from an independent QSC construction, or explicitly present the result as conditional on this assumption.
  2. [Section 5.6, eq. (5.23)] The near-BMN match for massless-massless scattering uses a conjectured conversion phase s_ij = 1/4 between the ZF and physical S matrices. Without this phase, the ZF result in eq. (H.22) carries the unremoved factor e^{-i pi/2} and would not agree with the perturbative result of [22]. Because this is the only external check in the massless-massless sector, the value s_ij = 1/4 should be derived from the exchange relations, or at least shown to be a direct consequence of the semionic statistics assumed in section 3.3, rather than introduced as a separate conjecture.
  3. [Section 6.3, eqs. (6.8)-(6.22)] The proposed mirror TBA equations are not fully specified because the integration contours C_A are not fixed. The text states that "Whether this choice of contours is correct requires substantially more careful analysis which will be done in a future publication." In a non-unitary mirror model, the reality of the densities rho_A and rho-bar_A depends on the contour choice, as the authors themselves note. Without a concrete contour prescription and at least a consistency check of the density equations (6.8), the TBA part of the abstract's claim is stronger than what is established. The authors should either provide the contours and verify the densities in a controlled limit, or clearly label the TBA proposal as conjectural and incomplete.
  4. [Section 4.1, eqs. (4.3)-(4.10)] The mixed-mass dressing factors are fixed only up to homogeneous solutions H^01, and the text selects H^01 as "the simplest solutions that appear to be the correct ones." No uniqueness proof is given; other solutions of eqs. (4.4) and (4.8) would change the S-matrix elements. Since the paper claims to complete the derivation of the dressing factors, an argument excluding other homogeneous solutions, for example by pole structure, fusion, or the perturbative checks, is needed to support that claim.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 5.8 and Appendix G.4] The pure-RR limit of the massless-massless S-matrix differs from [21,25] not only by the replacement a(gamma) -> -1, but also by a chirality-dependent sign epsilon_12, as shown in eq. (G.32). The text mentions this, but it should be stated more prominently that the RR limit is therefore not identical to the earlier result in both chirality sectors, and the physical consequences for excited-state TBA equations should be discussed.
  2. [Section 5.6, eq. (5.28)] In the last line of eq. (5.28), the second argument of S00_TT is written as x-tilde^{+-0}_{L1}, which appears to be a typo; the second particle should presumably have a different rapidity variable, such as x-tilde^{+-0}_{L2}.
  3. [Section 4.1, eq. (4.20)] The Barnes-function representation of the massless HL factor is introduced with the statement that it was "found and checked numerically." The paper would be strengthened by a derivation of this identity, or at least by a statement of the numerical precision and the range of parameters over which the check was performed.
  4. [General notation] The distinction between positive and negative momentum branches is central to the paper but is encoded in many different notations (p, p - 2 pi, x^{+-0}, gamma^{+-0}, left versus right variables). A summary table connecting the momentum branch, the relevant cuts, and the corresponding Zhukovsky and gamma variables would improve readability and reduce the risk of confusion.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The massless dressing factors and their near-BMN comparison rest on the authors' own semionic-statistics assumption; the construction is internally consistent, but the massless-massless sign is an input rather than a derived result, and the claimed tree-level match requires the conjectured phase s_ij=1/4 that is equivalent to that same input.

  1. ansatz smuggled in via citation [Section 3.3, eq. (3.16)]
    "In [18] we discussed in detail how to write 'generalised' crossing equations, valid for any exchange relations, and the possible modifications for the AdS3 × S3 × T4 S matrix. ... In analogy with what happens with the SU(2) CGN model — whose S matrix indeed appears in the SU(2)◦ part of the massless scattering — we will assume that massless particles have 'semionic' statistics, i.e. that exchanging any two massless particles produces a factor of ±i. ... As a result, the crossing equations are modified by a sign relative to those in [10,25]."

    The minus sign in the massless-massless crossing equation (3.16) is introduced by assuming the semionic exchange factor ±i, an assumption attributed to the authors' own preceding work [18]. All subsequent massless dressing factors, including (4.15), the normalization S00χχ(u,u)=-1, and the 'minimal solution' argument, are constructed as solutions of this modified crossing equation. The symmetry checks in Sections 5.2-5.5 therefore verify consistency with the assumed exchange relations, but they do not independently determine the sign. The paper does not derive the semionic exchange relation from the worldsheet S-matrix or from first principles; it imports it as a self-cited premise, making the central massless-massless sign an input rather than a derived prediction.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Section 5.6, eq. (5.23) and Appendix H, eqs. (H.22)-(H.23)]
    "In the case at hand we conjecture that s_ij = (1/4 if both i,j are massless, 1/2 FiFj else) ... For the massless-massless scattering it was crucial to keep track of an additional factor of i coming from the nontrivial exchange relations [18], cf. eq. (5.22)."

    The near-BMN 'agreement' with [22] is obtained only after converting the computed ZF S-matrix to the physical S-matrix using the phase e^{+2πi s_ij sgn(v1-v2)}. For massless-massless scattering, Appendix H.3 gives S = e^{-iπ/2}(1 - i p1p2/T), and the conjectured s_ij=1/4 supplies exactly e^{+iπ/2}, turning this into the published physical result 1 - i p1p2/T. Since s_ij=1/4 is the same semionic input used to select the sign in eq. (3.16), this step is not an independent confirmation of the massless dressing-factor sign; the phase necessary for the match is put in by the conjecture, while the genuinely predicted content is the O(1/T) coefficient of p1p2.

full rationale

The paper is not globally circular: the mixed-mass and massless dressing factors are obtained as massless limits of the massive dressing factors constructed in the authors' earlier work [17], and the resulting expressions are then tested against crossing, braiding unitarity, parity, CT, CP, and the independent perturbative results [8,22] and the relativistic bootstrap [11]. These do give substantive consistency checks. The circularity is localized to the massless-massless sector: the defining sign in the crossing equation is an assumed semionic exchange relation imported from the authors' prior paper [18], and the near-BMN comparison requires the conjectured conversion phase s_ij=1/4, which is algebraically the same input. The pure-RR limit and the relativistic limit likewise obtain agreement only after replacing or removing the factor a(γ) that had been introduced under the opposite-sign crossing equation. These steps make the central massless-massless claim conditional on a self-cited assumption rather than independently derived; nevertheless, the large amount of non-trivial analytic structure (BES/HL phases, Barnes-function representations, bound-state relations) is not itself forced by the semionic sign, so the score is moderate rather than maximal.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new particles or forces are introduced. The load-bearing ingredients are the semionic statistics assumption (from the authors' own [18]), the m-to-0 construction principle, the conjectured s_ij phases used in the physical/ZF conversion, the chosen homogeneous solutions H, and the conjectured TBA integration contours. The pure-RR limit leaves one chirality-dependent sign undetermined by the ground-state TBA.

free parameters (4)
  • s_ij exchange-relation phases = s_ij = 1/4 for massless-massless; 1/2 Fi Fj otherwise (Fi = 1 for psi, psibar, chi, chibar; 0 for Z, Zbar, Y, Ybar, T)…
    Conjectured values required to convert the computed ZF S-matrix into the physical S-matrix that matches tree-level perturbation theory [22] (section 5.6). Discrete, but load-bearing for the near-BMN agreement.
  • H-function homogeneous solutions = H01_chiY = sqrt(alphatilde-_L2)/sqrt(alphatilde+_L2), H01_chiZbar = sqrt(alphatilde+_R2)/sqrt(alphatilde-_R2) (eq. 4.10)
    Chosen as the 'simplest solutions' of the homogeneous crossing equations (4.4), (4.8); square-root branches fixed by fusion requirements. Not derived.
  • Chirality sign epsilon_12 in pure-RR limit = epsilon_12 = -1 (same chirality), +1 (opposite chirality) (eq. G.33)
    The paper notes this sign is not fixed by ground-state TBA and 'can only be fixed by studying the equations for excited states' (section 5.8).
  • Mirror TBA integration contours = real-mirror-momentum contours conjectured (section 6.3)
    The contour family is conjectured to be deformable to the stated shape; the paper says this 'requires substantially more careful analysis'.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Monodromy and unitarity properties of the Barnes G-function combination R(gamma) (appendix A.2, eqs. A.8-A.9)
    Used throughout the odd dressing factors and the Barnes representations of HL phases.
  • domain assumption Integrability of the Green-Schwarz action in light-cone gauge: two-particle S-matrix fixed by symmetries up to dressing factors; multi-particle S-matrix by Yang-Baxter (section 1, citing [6,7,10])
    The whole bootstrap framework assumes this.
  • ad hoc to paper Semionic exchange statistics for massless particles (section 3.3, from reference [18])
    Assumed; flips the sign of the massless crossing equation (3.16). Load-bearing.
  • ad hoc to paper Massless dressing factors are the m to 0 limit of the massive ones, with contour deformations for BES/HL integrals (section 4.1)
    Construction principle; the limit is delicate because massless Zhukovsky variables approach the integration contours.
  • ad hoc to paper Trivial exchange relations for massive-massless sectors (footnote 9), justified ex-post by perturbation theory
    Explicitly an ex-post check.
  • domain assumption Mirror TBA has the same form as the pure-RR one [21] (section 6.3)
    Stated expectation, not derived, for the ground-state TBA system.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dressing Factors and Mirror Thermodynamic Bethe Ansatz for mixed-flux AdS3/CFT2." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LTKCTT7D

@misc{pith2026250712191,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dressing Factors and Mirror Thermodynamic Bethe Ansatz for mixed-flux AdS3/CFT2},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LTKCTT7D}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.12191}
}
abstract

We complete the derivation of the dressing factors for the $AdS_3\times S^3\times T^4$ S matrix with mixed Ramond--Ramond and Neveu-Schwarz-Neveu-Schwarz flux, in the "string" and "mirror" kinematics. Using these, we propose the mirror Thermodynamic Bethe Ansatz equations which describe the spectrum of the model at any string tension.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. On the $AdS_3\times S^3\times S^3\times S^1$ dressing factors

    hep-th 2025-12 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

    Dressing factors are proposed for the S-matrix of massive worldsheet excitations in AdS3×S3×S3×S1 with mixed RR/NSNS flux that satisfy crossing, unitarity, and reproduce perturbative results for any radius ratio.

  2. Deriving the $\text{AdS}_3\times\text{S}^3\times \text{T}^4$ Quantum Spectral Curve I: Y-system and discontinuity relations

    hep-th 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    The pure-RR AdS3×S3×T4 mirror TBA is reformulated as an extended Y-system with local discontinuity relations, and the TBA is recovered by inversion, establishing their equivalence.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [17]

    Frolov, D

    S. Frolov, D. Polvara and A. Sfondrini,Massive dressing factors for mixed-flux AdS3/CFT2, 2501.05995

    arXiv

  2. [8]

    Hoare and A.A

    B. Hoare and A.A. Tseytlin,On string theory on AdS3 ×S3 ×T4 with mixed 3-form flux: tree-level S-matrix, Nucl. Phys. B873 (2013) 682 [1303.1037]

    arXiv 2013

  3. [22]

    On the worldsheet S matrix of the AdS3/CFT2 mixed-flux mirror model

    N. Baglioni, D. Polvara, A. Pone and A. Sfondrini,On the worldsheet S matrix of the AdS3/CFT2 mixed-flux mirror model, JHEP 05 (2024) 237 [2308.15927]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  4. [11]

    Frolov, D

    S. Frolov, D. Polvara and A. Sfondrini,On mixed-flux worldsheet scattering in AdS3/CFT2, JHEP 11 (2023) 055 [2306.17553]

    arXiv 2023

  5. [18]

    Frolov, D

    S. Frolov, D. Polvara and A. Sfondrini,Exchange relations and crossing, 2506.04096

    arXiv

  6. [28]

    Ekhammar, N

    S. Ekhammar, N. Gromov and B. Stefański,Demystifying the Massless Sector in AdS_3 Quantum Spectral Curve, 2412.11915

    arXiv

  7. [25]

    Frolov and A

    S. Frolov and A. Sfondrini,New dressing factors for AdS3/CFT2, JHEP 04 (2022) 162 [2112.08896]

    arXiv 2022

  8. [1]

    Maldacena,The Large N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity, Adv

    J.M. Maldacena,The Large N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2 (1998) 231 [hep-th/9711200]

    arXiv 1998

Show all 53 references
  1. [2]

    David, G

    J.R. David, G. Mandal and S.R. Wadia,Microscopic formulation of black holes in string theory, Phys. Rept. 369 (2002) 549 [hep-th/0203048]

    2002 arXiv

  2. [3]

    Seibold and A

    F.K. Seibold and A. Sfondrini,AdS3 Integrability, Tensionless Limits, and Deformations: A Review, 2408.08414

  3. [4]

    Maldacena and H

    J.M. Maldacena and H. Ooguri,Strings in AdS3 and SL(2, R) WZW model. I, J. Math. Phys. 42 (2001) 2929 [hep-th/0001053]

    2001 arXiv

  4. [5]

    M. Cho, S. Collier and X. Yin,Strings in Ramond-Ramond Backgrounds from the Neveu-Schwarz-Ramond Formalism, JHEP 12 (2020) 123 [1811.00032]

    2020 arXiv

  5. [6]

    Cagnazzo and K

    A. Cagnazzo and K. Zarembo,B-field in AdS(3)/CFT(2) Correspondence and Integrability, JHEP 11 (2012) 133 [1209.4049]

    2012 arXiv

  6. [7]

    Arutyunov and S

    G. Arutyunov and S. Frolov,Foundations of the AdS5 ×S5 superstring. part I, J. Phys. A A42 (2009) 254003 [0901.4937]

    2009 arXiv

  7. [9]

    Hoare, A

    B. Hoare, A. Stepanchuk and A. Tseytlin,Giant magnon solution and dispersion relation in string theory in AdS3 ×S3 ×T4 with mixed flux, Nucl. Phys. B879 (2014) 318 [1311.1794]

    2014 arXiv

  8. [10]

    Lloyd, O

    T. Lloyd, O. Ohlsson Sax, A. Sfondrini and B. Stefański, jr.,The complete worldsheet S matrix of superstrings on AdS3 ×S3 ×T4 with mixed three-form flux, Nucl. Phys. B891 (2015) 570 [1410.0866]

    2015 arXiv

  9. [12]

    Ohlsson Sax, D

    O. Ohlsson Sax, D. Riabchenko and B. Stefański jr.,Worldsheet kinematics, dressing factors and odd crossing in mixed-flux AdS3 backgrounds, JHEP 09 (2024) 132 [2312.09288]

    2024 arXiv

  10. [13]

    Frolov, D

    S. Frolov, D. Polvara and A. Sfondrini,Dressing factors for mixed-flux AdS3×S3×T4 superstrings, Phys. Rev. D111 (2025) L081901 [2402.11732]

    2025 arXiv

  11. [14]

    Demulder, S

    S. Demulder, S. Driezen, B. Knighton, G. Oling, A.L. Retore, F.K. Seibold et al.,Exact approaches on the string worldsheet, J. Phys. A57 (2024) 423001 [2312.12930]

    2024 arXiv

  12. [15]

    Zamolodchikov and A.B

    A.B. Zamolodchikov and A.B. Zamolodchikov,Factorized S-matrices in two dimensions as the exact solutions of certain relativistic quantum field models, Annals Phys. 120 (1979) 253

    1979

  13. [16]

    Janik,The AdS5 ×S5 superstring worldsheet S-matrix and crossing symmetry, Phys

    R.A. Janik,The AdS5 ×S5 superstring worldsheet S-matrix and crossing symmetry, Phys. Rev. D73 (2006) 086006 [hep-th/0603038]

    2006 arXiv

  14. [19]

    Arutyunov and S

    G. Arutyunov and S. Frolov,On string S-matrix, bound states and TBA, JHEP 0712 (2007) 024 [0710.1568]

    2007 arXiv

  15. [20]

    Zamolodchikov,Thermodynamic Bethe ansatz in relativistic models

    A.B. Zamolodchikov,Thermodynamic Bethe ansatz in relativistic models. Scaling three state Potts and Lee-Yang models, Nucl. Phys. B342 (1990) 695. – 95 –

    1990

  16. [21]

    Frolov and A

    S. Frolov and A. Sfondrini,Mirror thermodynamic Bethe ansatz for AdS3/CFT2, JHEP 03 (2022) 138 [2112.08898]

    2022 arXiv

  17. [23]

    Fontanella and A

    A. Fontanella and A. Torrielli,Geometry of Massless Scattering in Integrable Superstring, JHEP 06 (2019) 116 [1903.10759]

    2019 arXiv

  18. [24]

    Beisert, R

    N. Beisert, R. Hernández and E. López,A crossing-symmetric phase for AdS5 ×S5, JHEP 0611 (2006) 070 [hep-th/0609044]

    2006 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Borsato, O

    R. Borsato, O. Ohlsson Sax, A. Sfondrini and B. Stefański, jr,The complete AdS3 ×S3 ×T4 worldsheet S-matrix, JHEP 1410 (2014) 66 [1406.0453]

    2014 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Eden, D.l

    B. Eden, D.l. Plat and A. Sfondrini,Integrable bootstrap for AdS3/CFT2 correlation functions, 2102.08365

    arXiv

  21. [29]

    Cavaglia, D

    A. Cavaglia, D. Polvara, N. Primi, A. Sfondrini and R. Tateo,Y system for AdS3× S3× T4, to appear,

  22. [30]

    Sundin and L

    P. Sundin and L. Wulff,The AdSn ×Sn ×T10−2n BMN string at two loops, JHEP 11 (2015) 154 [1508.04313]

    2015 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Sundin and L

    P. Sundin and L. Wulff,The complete one-loop BMN S-matrix in AdS3 ×S3 ×T4, 1605.01632

    arXiv

  24. [32]

    Sundin and L

    P. Sundin and L. Wulff,One- and two-loop checks for the AdS3 ×S3 ×T4 superstring with mixed flux, J. Phys. A48 (2015) 105402 [1411.4662]

    2015 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Bianchi and B

    L. Bianchi and B. Hoare,AdS3 ×S3 × M 4 string S-matrices from unitarity cuts, JHEP 1408 (2014) 097 [1405.7947]

    2014 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Roiban, P

    R. Roiban, P. Sundin, A. Tseytlin and L. Wulff,The one-loop worldsheet S-matrix for the AdSn ×Sn ×T10−2n superstring, JHEP 1408 (2014) 160 [1407.7883]

    2014 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Smirnov,Quantum groups and generalized statistics in integrable models, Commun

    F.A. Smirnov,Quantum groups and generalized statistics in integrable models, Commun. Math. Phys. 132 (1990) 415

    1990

  28. [36]

    Fontanella, O

    A. Fontanella, O. Ohlsson Sax, B. Stefański and A. Torrielli,The effectiveness of relativistic invariance in AdS3, JHEP 07 (2019) 105 [1905.00757]

    2019 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Frolov, A

    S. Frolov, A. Pribytok and A. Sfondrini,Ground state energy of twisted AdS3 × S3 × T4 superstring and the TBA, JHEP 09 (2023) 027 [2305.17128]

    2023 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Arutyunov and S

    G. Arutyunov and S. Frolov,Thermodynamic Bethe ansatz for the AdS5 ×S5 mirror model, JHEP 0905 (2009) 068 [0903.0141]

    2009 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Dorey and R

    P. Dorey and R. Tateo,Excited states by analytic continuation of TBA equations, Nucl. Phys. B482 (1996) 639 [hep-th/9607167]

    1996 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Baggio and A

    M. Baggio and A. Sfondrini,Strings on NS-NS Backgrounds as Integrable Deformations, Phys. Rev. D98 (2018) 021902 [1804.01998]. – 96 –

    2018 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Dei and A

    A. Dei and A. Sfondrini,Integrable spin chain for stringy Wess-Zumino-Witten models, JHEP 07 (2018) 109 [1806.00422]

    2018 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Brollo, D

    A. Brollo, D. le Plat, A. Sfondrini and R. Suzuki,Tensionless Limit of Pure–Ramond-Ramond Strings and AdS3/CFT2, Phys. Rev. Lett.131 (2023) 161604 [2303.02120]

    2023 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Brollo, D

    A. Brollo, D. le Plat, A. Sfondrini and R. Suzuki,More on the tensionless limit of pure-Ramond-Ramond AdS3/CFT2, JHEP 12 (2023) 160 [2308.11576]

    2023 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Ekhammar and D

    S. Ekhammar and D. Volin,Monodromy bootstrap for SU(2|2) quantum spectral curves: from Hubbard model to AdS3/CFT2, JHEP 03 (2022) 192 [2109.06164]

    2022 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Cavaglià, N

    A. Cavaglià, N. Gromov, B. Stefański, Jr., Jr. and A. Torrielli,Quantum Spectral Curve for AdS3/CFT2: a proposal, JHEP 12 (2021) 048 [2109.05500]

    2021 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Cavaglià, S

    A. Cavaglià, S. Ekhammar, N. Gromov and P. Ryan,Exploring the Quantum Spectral Curve for AdS3/CFT2, JHEP 12 (2023) 089 [2211.07810]

    2023 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Giribet, C

    G. Giribet, C. Hull, M. Kleban, M. Porrati and E. Rabinovici,Superstrings on AdS3 at k = 1, JHEP 08 (2018) 204 [1803.04420]

    2018 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Gaberdiel and R

    M.R. Gaberdiel and R. Gopakumar,Tensionless string spectra on AdS3, JHEP 05 (2018) 085 [1803.04423]

    2018 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Eberhardt, M.R

    L. Eberhardt, M.R. Gaberdiel and R. Gopakumar,The Worldsheet Dual of the Symmetric Product CFT, JHEP 04 (2019) 103 [1812.01007]

    2019 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Frolov and A

    S. Frolov and A. Sfondrini,Comments on integrability in the symmetric orbifold, JHEP 08 (2024) 179 [2312.14114]

    2024 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Fabri, A

    M. Fabri, A. Sfondrini and T. Skrzypek,Perturbed symmetric-product orbifold: first-order mixing and puzzles for integrability, 2504.13091

  44. [52]

    Borsato, O

    R. Borsato, O. Ohlsson Sax and A. Sfondrini,A dynamic su(1|1)2 S-matrix for AdS3/CFT2, JHEP 1304 (2013) 113 [1211.5119]

    2013 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Borsato, O

    R. Borsato, O. Ohlsson Sax, A. Sfondrini and B. Stefański, jr.,The AdS3 ×S3 ×S3 ×S1 worldsheet S matrix, J. Phys. A48 (2015) 415401 [1506.00218]. – 97 –

    2015 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.