Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Timelike entanglement and central charge for quantum BTZ black holes

T0 review · 4 major / 6 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 Timelike entanglement entropy of quantum BTZ black holes falls sharply with increasing backreaction, tracing a phase transition in the extremal surface.

desk verdict The claimed phase transition and falling central charge rest on a sign error in the Lorentzian continuation, so the paper's central results are not established, though the setup and numerics are clearly presented. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.19813 v2 pith:LWXYVBLU submitted 2025-07-26 hep-th gr-qc

Dibakar Roychowdhury This is my paper
classification hep-thgr-qc
keywords timelikeentanglemententropyquantumBTZblackholeKarch-RandallbraneworldcentralchargebackreactionphasetransitionextremalsurfacedefectCFT
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper tries to establish that timelike entanglement entropy, computed holographically from an extremal surface inside a Karch-Randall braneworld, can probe quantum backreaction effects on quantum BTZ black holes. It claims that beyond a critical backreaction the extremal surface becomes unstable and disintegrates, producing a phase transition, and that the same computation yields an effective central charge for the dual 2d defect CFT which drops sharply as backreaction grows. If true, timelike entanglement entropy is a non-perturbative probe of quantum backreaction and a way to define the central charge of the defect CFT. The analysis uses a Lorentzian continuation of the area functional and reproduces the classical BTZ results in the zero-backreaction limit.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the extremal-area functional A = 2∫ dζ sqrt(λf(r)t˙² + r˙²/f(r)) for a constant-ϕ geodesic, regulated by the parameter λ = ±1, where λ = −1 selects the Lorentzian timelike entanglement entropy. The argument then rests on three pieces: the turning-point constraint r˙² + E² = λf(r), the stability function Z(rc) = (d/dr)(πG(r)/F'(r))|_{r=rc} whose sign marks whether the extremal surface is stable or unstable, and the slab central charge cslab = TL ∂_TL S_tEE evaluated as a difference ratio relative to the classical BTZ solution.

What would settle it

Recompute the quantum BTZ integrals for the extremal area keeping the full complex result instead of dropping Im S_tEE, and check whether the real part still shows the same critical backreaction γc = $rc^{3}$/r+; if the imaginary part is not numerically small at the values in Table I, or if it changes sign near the transition, the reported tEE and central-charge curve would need revision.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that for quantum BTZ black holes in a Karch-Randall braneworld, the holographic timelike entanglement entropy decreases as the quantum backreaction parameter γ grows, and that this decrease is caused by an instability of the extremal surface: at a critical backreaction γc = $rc^{3}$/r+ the stability function Z(rc) changes sign, the connected extremal surface disintegrates into a pair of disconnected surfaces, and a phase transition occurs. Using the slab definition cslab = TL ∂_TL S_tEE, the paper further claims that the central charge of the dual 2d defect CFT falls rapidly from its classical value (satisfying c/6 = 1/(4G3)) and saturates for large backreaction. The conclusion is that timelike entanglement entropy provides a non-perturbative measure of how quantum backreaction reduces the effective degrees of freedom of the dual CFT.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the analytic-continuation rule that Lorentzian timelike entanglement entropy follows from setting λ = −1 in the area functional and keeping only the real part of the resulting extremal area, even though the classical limit carries an imaginary term iπc/6; if that rule or the neglect of the imaginary part is wrong, the entropy, the phase transition, and the central-charge curve all change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Timelike entanglement entropy can act as a probe of quantum-backreaction-induced phase transitions in braneworld holography, because the extremal surface disintegrates beyond a critical backreaction.
  • The central charge of the 2d defect CFT can be read off from timelike entanglement entropy, approaching the classical relation c/6 = 1/(4G3) for small backreaction and saturating for γ ≥ 1.
  • In the zero-backreaction limit, the algorithm reproduces the known classical BTZ timelike entanglement entropy, including the imaginary piece iπc/6.
  • The stability function Z(rc) gives a geometric criterion for backreaction-induced destabilization: a sign change from negative to positive signals the phase transition.
  • The transition resembles known entanglement phase transitions in confining gauge theories, but here it is driven by quantum backreaction on the brane rather than by the geometry of the confining background.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the imaginary part of the timelike entanglement entropy is not genuinely negligible at larger backreaction, the real-part-only central charge curve could miss an additional branch or develop a discontinuity, so a complexified version of cslab might be a sharper diagnostic.
  • The same λ-parametrised area functional could be applied directly to charged and rotating quantum BTZ solutions, where the critical backreaction and the central-charge fall-off would likely shift in a calculable way.
  • The sign-change criterion Z(rc) suggests a general pattern: any brane backreaction that makes the effective potential non-monotonic will trigger an extremal-surface phase transition, so timelike entanglement entropy may serve as a universal backreaction detector.
  • The slab central charge could be interpreted as a running c-function along the backreaction direction, and checking its monotonicity would connect this computation to a c-theorem for defect CFTs.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. The paper computes holographic timelike entanglement entropy (tEE) for quantum BTZ black holes on a Karch-Randall brane, using a parameter λ to interpolate between Euclidean (λ=+1) and Lorentzian (λ=-1) area functionals. The classical BTZ case is revisited in Section III, and the qBTZ case is treated in Section IV by numerically integrating the extremal-surface area and the timelike interval. The paper claims that increasing the backreaction parameter γ triggers an instability of the extremal surface, producing a phase transition, and that the tEE defines a slab central charge c_slab that falls sharply with γ. The central quantitative results are the non-perturbative curves in Figs. 1-3 and Table I.

Significance. If the computation were correct, it would be a useful step in extending timelike entanglement entropy to a non-perturbative backreaction regime and in connecting tEE to a central-charge-like quantity in a braneworld defect CFT. The paper has some strengths: it works with the exact qBTZ solution, it reproduces the classical BTZ tEE in the Euclidean sector, and it gives explicit analytic expressions in Section III. However, the Lorentzian continuation is not handled in a controlled way: the main integrals are not well defined as written, the classical imaginary part is discarded without justification, and the central-charge claim is a repackaging of the same tEE data. These issues affect the phase-transition and central-charge conclusions directly, so the paper's central claims are not currently supported.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section IV, Eqs. (32)-(33), Table I, Figs. 1-3] The Lorentzian integrals are not well-defined as written. For λ=-1, Eq. (12) gives \dot r^2 + E^2 = -f(r), so \dot r is purely imaginary; substituting this into (13) and (17) requires a branch choice for the square root and for the overall factors of \sqrt{\lambda}, and the paper does not state that choice. This is not only a sign issue: for the parameters used in Section IV (r_b=10, r_+=0.2, r_c=0.1, γ≥0), f(r) has a simple zero at r=r_+ inside the integration domain [r_c,r_b], so the integrands in (32) and (33) behave as 1/(r-r_+) near the horizon and both integrals diverge. The finite entries in Table I and the curves in Figs. 1-3 can only be obtained after an additional contour prescription or principal-value regularization, which is neither given nor justified.
  2. [Section IV, text after Eq. (33), and Section III, Eq. (30)] The statement that the imaginary component of tEE is 'largely suppressed' is inconsistent with the classical limit that the paper itself uses as a check. Eq. (30) gives Im S_tEE = iπ c/6 for γ=0, which is parametrically the same size as the real part (of order one in units S0=1/(4G3) for c~O(1)). Table I, by contrast, reports Im S_tEE ~ 10^{-9} S0 in the small-γ regime. Thus the numerical evaluation does not reduce to the exact classical tEE (30); the imaginary part has been discarded rather than computed from the stated integrals.
  3. [Section IV.B, Eqs. (38)-(40), Fig. 3] The central-charge result is a re-parameterization of the tEE data rather than an independent determination. The quantity c_slab is defined in (38) as T_L ∂_{T_L} S_tEE, and the numerical implementation (40) is a finite difference between the γ≠0 and γ=0 values of the same integrals (32)-(33). The fall-off of c_slab shown in Fig. 3 therefore follows directly from the shape of the tEE curve, so it cannot by itself establish a decrease of the true central charge of the dual CFT. Moreover, the classical check (39) gives c_slab = κ c with an interval-dependent prefactor κ=r_+ E T_L/(12 r_b) ≪ 1; this means c_slab is not equal to the Brown-Henneaux central charge c, and the paper does not show that κ is a constant that can be absorbed or normalized away.
  4. [Section IV.A, Eqs. (35)-(37) and footnote [65]] The stability criterion is not well defined for λ=-1. Eq. (36) contains a factor 1/√λ, which is ±i in the Lorentzian signature, so Z(r_c) is purely imaginary; the footnote [65] acknowledges this by saying that one must consider the imaginary component. A sign of a purely imaginary quantity cannot define a stable/unstable split without fixing the branch of √λ and explaining why that sign controls stability under perturbations. Consequently, the predicted transition at γ_c = r_c^3/r_+ is not established.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Eq. (17)] The prefactor in A_ext^{(λ)} appears inconsistent with the on-shell Lagrangian: Eq. (9) with the constraint (11) gives an overall factor 2√λ ∫ dr/\dot r, whereas Eq. (17) writes 2/√λ ∫ dr/\dot r. This affects the signs and phases in Eqs. (23)-(24) and (33).
  2. [Eqs. (15), (22), (27)] The status of T_L is unclear: (15) gives T_L=-i T_E, which is purely imaginary if T_E is real, while (22) gives a complex T_L for E<r_+ (because tanh^{-1}(r_+/E) has an imaginary part when its argument exceeds unity), and (27) treats T_L as real. The paper should state explicitly whether T_L is real, complex, or a modulus.
  3. [Eqs. (32)-(33), Fig. 1(b)] The notation |T_L| in (32) and 'we consider its magnitude only' should be made precise; currently T_L appears both as a complex quantity in (30) and as a real magnitude in the numerical plots, without a definition of the branch or the sign convention.
  4. [Table I] The table lists r_b, r_+, and γ but omits r_c and the corresponding E determined by Eq. (31); this information is needed to reproduce Im S_tEE.
  5. [Fig. 3] The axes labeled '1 γ' and 'c_slab' are unclear; the figure should specify the normalization of c_slab (for example, c_slab/c or c_slab/κc) and the fixed parameters r_+, r_b, r_c.
  6. [Throughout] There are several typos and stylistic issues, including 'bacreaction' (Introduction), 'Our staring points' (Section IV), and 'not form the perspective of the bulk AdS4' (Introduction). The PACS field is empty.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The central charge is defined as a derivative of the same tEE computed in the paper, so its fall-off is a repackaging; the Lorentzian tEE recipe is imported from the author's own Refs [47]-[48].

  1. self definitional [Section IV.B, Eqs. (38)-(40)]
    "Given tEE, we define the central charge associated with the slab-like entangling region as [47], [57] cslab = TL∂TL StEE . (38)"

    c_slab is defined as the derivative of the very tEE computed from eq (33), and eq (40) implements it as a finite difference between the gamma≠0 and gamma=0 values of that same StEE and TL. Therefore Fig. 3 is a repackaging of the slope of Fig. 2: the reported sharp fall-off in the central charge is not an independent probe of the dual CFT, but a restatement of the tEE data. The classical check (39) does not anchor the normalization to the Brown-Henneaux central charge, giving c_slab = κc with κ = r+ETL/(12rb) << 1 depending on the arbitrary cut-off rb. The claimed relation between tEE and central charge is hence true by construction rather than by holographic derivation.

  2. self citation load bearing [Section II, after Eq. (5)]
    "In the present paper, we follow a recent proposal [47]-[48] that bypasses the analytic continuation ( T → iT ) and produces the correct results."

    Refs [47] and [48] are both by C. Nunez and D. Roychowdhury, with Roychowdhury being the author of the present paper. The λ=±1 Lorentzian continuation, the identification tEE ↔ λ=-1, the phase-transition criterion, and the c_slab definition (38) are all imported from this self-citation chain rather than rederived. The only external check is the classical BTZ limit reproducing [34],[37]; the qBTZ extensions and the central-charge interpretation inherit their justification from the author's own prior proposals. This is load-bearing because the central claims of a phase transition and a falling central charge depend on this imported framework.

full rationale

The derivation of the classical tEE is self-contained and reproduces the known BTZ result, so the paper is not wholly circular. However, the central-charge claim reduces by construction: Eq. (38) defines c_slab as a derivative of the tEE computed in the same paper, and Eq. (40) evaluates that derivative as a finite difference of the same computed data. Thus the observed decrease of c_slab with backreaction is an automatic consequence of the shape of the tEE curve, not a test of an independent CFT quantity. The Lorentzian recipe itself, including the λ=-1 continuation and the phase-transition interpretation, is adopted from the author's own Refs [47]-[48], with only the classical limit cross-checked against external work. These two features make the central 'prediction' partially circular. Possible sign inconsistencies in the Lorentzian integrals (e.g., eq (12) with λ=-1 versus the radicand in eqs (32)-(33)) concern correctness, not circularity, and are not counted here.

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

The paper does not introduce a new particle, force, or dimension. It introduces a new derived quantity, c_slab, and depends on the qBTZ solution and 2d defect CFT duality from earlier work. The most fragile input is the lambda continuation rule with neglect of the imaginary part, which is asserted rather than derived.

free parameters (4)
  • r_c (turning point) = 0.1
    Chosen by hand for all numerical plots; the critical backreaction gamma_c = r_c^3 / r_+ and the central-charge curve depend on this choice.
  • r_+ (horizon radius) = 0.2
    Chosen for the numerics; it fixes the classical background and enters the normalisation of c_slab in eq (39).
  • r_b (boundary cutoff) = 10
    Chosen as the finite boundary in the integrals (32)-(33); the classical c_slab in eq (39) depends on r_b.
  • gamma (backreaction parameter) = critical value read off as gamma about 0.005
    The instability threshold is stated as gamma > 0.005 for the chosen r_c, r_+, r_b; the paper varies gamma independently rather than deriving it from the qBTZ solution's mass and brane tension.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The qBTZ metric (3) is an exact solution of the semiclassical Einstein equations on the Karch-Randall brane to all orders in backreaction.
    Taken from Ref [4]; the central computation uses this metric as the background for all extremal-surface integrals.
  • domain assumption The qBTZ black hole is dual to a thermal state in a 2d defect CFT living at the brane-boundary intersection.
    Stated as a conjecture in the abstract and Introduction; the central-charge claim assumes this duality.
  • domain assumption The holographic tEE for the brane observer is given by the 3d extremal area functional (9)-(17) with the lambda parameter continuation.
    Follows from Refs [34], [37], [47]; no independent derivation is provided for the brane context.
  • ad hoc to paper The imaginary part of the Lorentzian extremal area can be neglected.
    Stated in Section IV: 'the imaginary component is largely suppressed compared to the real component'; no threshold or justification is given, and it conflicts with the classical Im S_tEE = i pi c/6.
  • domain assumption The stability criterion Z(r_c) from Wilson-loop studies applies to tEE extremal surfaces.
    Equation (35) is borrowed from Ref [52]; the paper itself notes that at this level this is purely an analogy.
  • domain assumption c_slab = T_L partial_{T_L} S_tEE is the central charge of the defect CFT.
    Equation (38) is taken from Refs [47], [57]; the classical check (39)-(40) is not consistent with direct differentiation of (30), so the normalisation is not anchored.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Timelike entanglement and central charge for quantum BTZ black holes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LWXYVBLU

@misc{pith2026250719813,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Timelike entanglement and central charge for quantum BTZ black holes},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LWXYVBLU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.19813}
}
abstract

We compute holographic timelike entanglement entropy for quantum BTZ black holes in a Karch-Randall braneworld scenario. These black holes are exact solutions of massive 3d gravity on the brane and are conjectured to be dual to thermal states in 2d defect CFTs, living at the interface of the brane and the boundary of the bulk $AdS_4$. Our analysis reveals an interesting relation between the tEE and the central charge pertaining to the dual CFT, which receives nontrivial corrections due to quantum backreaction effects on the Karch-Randall brane, which is explored non-perturbatively.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.19813 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: (a)Variation of tEE with backreaction parameter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: Timelike entanglement vs. subsystem size with in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Temporal Entanglement from Twist Correlators in 2d Conformal Field Theory and Holography

    hep-th 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Timelike entanglement entropy in 2d CFT is defined by time-ordered twist correlators, whose holographic saddles are complex geodesics with smallest real length, and whose imaginary part counts causal-diamond crossings...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [65]

    For example, κ = −1 corresponds to classical BTZ solution and κ = +1 corresponds to global AdS3 geometry on the brane

    With l = 0, different brane geometries are obtained for different choices of κ. For example, κ = −1 corresponds to classical BTZ solution and κ = +1 corresponds to global AdS3 geometry on the brane

    work page

  2. [1]

    Quantum black holes as holograms in AdS brane worlds,

    R. Emparan, A. Fabbri and N. Kaloper, “Quantum black holes as holograms in AdS brane worlds,” JHEP 08, 043 (2002) doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2002/08/043 [arXiv:hep- 7 th/0206155 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 2002

  3. [2]

    Exact description of black holes on branes,

    R. Emparan, G. T. Horowitz and R. C. Myers, “Exact description of black holes on branes,” JHEP 01, 007 (2000) doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2000/01/007 [arXiv:hep- th/9911043 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 2000

  4. [3]

    Ex- act description of black holes on branes. 2. Comparison with BTZ black holes and black strings,

    R. Emparan, G. T. Horowitz and R. C. Myers, “Ex- act description of black holes on branes. 2. Comparison with BTZ black holes and black strings,” JHEP 01, 021 (2000) doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2000/01/021 [arXiv:hep- th/9912135 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 2000

  5. [4]

    Quan- tum BTZ black hole,

    R. Emparan, A. M. Frassino and B. Way, “Quan- tum BTZ black hole,” JHEP 11, 137 (2020) doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2020)137 [arXiv:2007.15999 [hep- th]]

    arXiv 2020

  6. [5]

    Charged rotating quantum black holes,

    D. Bhattacharya, R. A. Hennigar, R. B. Mann and M. Zhang, “Charged rotating quantum black holes,” [arXiv:2506.19941 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  7. [6]

    Black holes in dS 3,

    R. Emparan, J. F. Pedraza, A. Svesko, M. Tomaˇ sevi´ c and M. R. Visser, “Black holes in dS 3,” JHEP 11, 073 (2022) doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2022)073 [arXiv:2207.03302 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2022

  8. [7]

    and their charged [8]-[9] and rotating black hole [4]-[5] generalizations have garnered renewed interest in recent years due to various exciting features [59]. It has been a long-standing problem to address the issue of black hole formation in the presence of large quantum backreaction effects [24]-[27], which becomes even more challenging in the presence...

    work page

Show all 69 references
  1. [8]

    Chem- ical potential and charge in quantum black holes,

    A. Climent, R. Emparan and R. A. Hennigar, “Chem- ical potential and charge in quantum black holes,” JHEP 08, 150 (2024) doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2024)150 [arXiv:2404.15148 [hep-th]]

    2024 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Quantum charged black holes,

    Y. Feng, H. Ma, R. B. Mann, Y. Xue and M. Zhang, “Quantum charged black holes,” JHEP 08, 184 (2024) doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2024)184 [arXiv:2404.07192 [hep- th]]

    2024 arXiv

  3. [10]

    Three- Dimensional Quantum Black Holes: A Primer,

    E. Panella, J. F. Pedraza and A. Svesko, “Three- Dimensional Quantum Black Holes: A Primer,” Uni- verse 10, no.9, 358 (2024) doi:10.3390/universe10090358 [arXiv:2407.03410 [hep-th]]

    2024 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Quantum Kerr-de Sitter black holes in three dimensions,

    E. Panella and A. Svesko, “Quantum Kerr-de Sitter black holes in three dimensions,” JHEP 06, 127 (2023) doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2023)127 [arXiv:2303.08845 [hep- th]]

    2023 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Quantum Inequalities for Quantum Black Holes,

    A. M. Frassino, R. A. Hennigar, J. F. Pedraza and A. Svesko, “Quantum Inequalities for Quantum Black Holes,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, no.18, 181501 (2024) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.133.181501 [arXiv:2406.17860 [hep-th]]

    2024 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Thermodynamical topol- ogy of quantum BTZ black hole,

    S. P. Wu and S. W. Wei, “Thermodynamical topol- ogy of quantum BTZ black hole,” Phys. Rev. D 110, no.2, 024054 (2024) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.024054 [arXiv:2403.14167 [gr-qc]]

    2024 arXiv

  7. [14]

    Ther- modynamic bounce effect in quantum BTZ black hole,

    Z. M. Xu, P. P. Zhang, B. Wu and X. Zhang, “Ther- modynamic bounce effect in quantum BTZ black hole,” JHEP 12, 181 (2024) doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2024)181 [arXiv:2407.08241 [gr-qc]]

    2024 arXiv

  8. [15]

    Perturbing a quantum black hole,

    C. Cartwright, U. G¨ ursoy, J. F. Pedraza and G. Planella Planas, “Perturbing a quantum black hole,” JHEP 03, 039 (2025) doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2025)039 [arXiv:2408.08010 [hep-th]]

    2025 arXiv

  9. [16]

    Quantum induced superradiance,

    C. Cartwright, U. G¨ ursoy, J. F. Pedraza and A. Svesko, “Quantum induced superradiance,” [arXiv:2501.17231 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  10. [17]

    Quantum censors: backreaction builds hori- zons,

    A. M. Frassino, R. A. Hennigar, J. F. Pedraza and A. Svesko, “Quantum censors: backreaction builds hori- zons,” [arXiv:2505.09689 [hep-th]]

  11. [18]

    Criticality and thermodynamic geometry of quantum BTZ black holes,

    S. A. Hosseini Mansoori, J. F. Pedraza and M. Rafiee, “Criticality and thermodynamic geometry of quantum BTZ black holes,” Phys. Rev. D111, no.2, 024012 (2025) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.111.024012 [arXiv:2403.13063 [hep-th]]

    2025 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Reentrant phase transitions of quantum black holes,

    A. M. Frassino, J. F. Pedraza, A. Svesko and M. R. Visser, “Reentrant phase transitions of quantum black holes,” Phys. Rev. D 109, no.12, 124040 (2024) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.124040 [arXiv:2310.12220 [hep-th]]

    2024 arXiv

  13. [20]

    Specific Heats for Rotating Quantum BTZ Black Holes in Extended Thermodynamics,

    R. Nazario, “Specific Heats for Rotating Quantum BTZ Black Holes in Extended Thermodynamics,” [arXiv:2502.02156 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  14. [21]

    Singularities in 2D and 3D quantum black holes,

    M. Kolanowski and M. Tomaˇ sevi´ c, “Singularities in 2D and 3D quantum black holes,” JHEP 12, 102 (2023) doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2023)102 [arXiv:2310.06014 [hep- th]]

    2023 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Holographic complexity of quantum black holes,

    R. Emparan, A. M. Frassino, M. Sasieta and M. Tomaˇ sevi´ c, “Holographic complexity of quantum black holes,” JHEP 02, 204 (2022) doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2022)204 [arXiv:2112.04860 [hep- th]]

    2022 arXiv

  16. [23]

    Specific heats for quantum BTZ black holes in extended thermody- namics,

    C. V. Johnson and R. Nazario, “Specific heats for quantum BTZ black holes in extended thermody- namics,” Phys. Rev. D 110, no.10, 106004 (2024) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.106004 [arXiv:2310.12212 [hep-th]]

    2024 arXiv

  17. [24]

    The Quantum stress tensor in the three-dimensional black hole,

    A. R. Steif, “The Quantum stress tensor in the three-dimensional black hole,” Phys. Rev. D 49, 585- 589 (1994) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.49.R585 [arXiv:gr- qc/9308032 [gr-qc]]

    1994

  18. [25]

    Quantum fluctuation of stress tensor and black holes in three dimensions,

    K. Shiraishi and T. Maki, “Quantum fluctuation of stress tensor and black holes in three dimensions,” Phys. Rev. D 49, 5286-5294 (1994) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.49.5286 [arXiv:1804.07872 [gr-qc]]

    1994 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Back reaction of a confor- mal field on a three-dimensional black hole,

    C. Martinez and J. Zanelli, “Back reaction of a confor- mal field on a three-dimensional black hole,” Phys. Rev. D 55, 3642-3646 (1997) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.55.3642 [arXiv:gr-qc/9610050 [gr-qc]]

    1997 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Holographic complex- ity of rotating quantum black holes,

    B. Chen, Y. Liu and B. Yu, “Holographic complex- ity of rotating quantum black holes,” JHEP 01, 055 (2024) doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2024)055 [arXiv:2307.15968 [hep-th]]

    2024 arXiv

  21. [28]

    provides a natural platform to address such issues, where the backreaction problem can be solved exactly. In braneworld holography, the IR cut-off surface in the bulk is replaced by an end of the world (ETW) brane, namely, the Randall-Sundrum (RS) [29]-[30] or Karch- Randall (...

  22. [29]

    A Large mass hierar- chy from a small extra dimension,

    L. Randall and R. Sundrum, “A Large mass hierar- chy from a small extra dimension,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 3370-3373 (1999) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.3370 [arXiv:hep-ph/9905221 [hep-ph]]

    1999 arXiv

  23. [30]

    An Alternative to compactification,

    L. Randall and R. Sundrum, “An Alternative to compactification,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 4690-4693 (1999) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.4690 [arXiv:hep- th/9906064 [hep-th]]

    1999

  24. [31]

    Quantum-corrected rotating black holes and naked sin- gularities in ( 2+1 ) dimensions,

    M. Casals, A. Fabbri, C. Mart ´ ınez and J. Zanelli, “Quantum-corrected rotating black holes and naked sin- gularities in ( 2+1 ) dimensions,” Phys. Rev. D 99, no.10, 104023 (2019) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.99.104023 [arXiv:1902.01583 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  25. [32]

    Grav- ity in warped compactifications and the holographic stress tensor,

    S. de Haro, K. Skenderis and S. N. Solodukhin, “Grav- ity in warped compactifications and the holographic stress tensor,” Class. Quant. Grav. 18, 3171-3180 (2001) doi:10.1088/0264-9381/18/16/307 [arXiv:hep- th/0011230 [hep-th]]

    2001

  26. [33]

    Pseudoentropy in dS/CFT and Timelike Entanglement Entropy,

    K. Doi, J. Harper, A. Mollabashi, T. Takayanagi and Y. Taki, “Pseudoentropy in dS/CFT and Timelike Entanglement Entropy,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, no.3, 031601 (2023) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.130.031601 [arXiv:2210.09457 [hep-th]]

    2023 arXiv

  27. [34]

    Timelike entanglement entropy,

    K. Doi, J. Harper, A. Mollabashi, T. Takayanagi and Y. Taki, “Timelike entanglement entropy,” JHEP05, 052 (2023) doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2023)052 [arXiv:2302.11695 [hep-th]]

    2023 arXiv

  28. [35]

    Locally localized gravity,

    A. Karch and L. Randall, “Locally localized gravity,” JHEP 05, 008 (2001) doi:10.1088/1126- 6708/2001/05/008 [arXiv:hep-th/0011156 [hep-th]]

    2001 arXiv

  29. [36]

    Open and closed string interpretation of SUSY CFT’s on branes with boundaries,

    A. Karch and L. Randall, “Open and closed string interpretation of SUSY CFT’s on branes with boundaries,” JHEP 06, 063 (2001) doi:10.1088/1126- 6708/2001/06/063 [arXiv:hep-th/0105132 [hep-th]]. 8

    2001 arXiv

  30. [37]

    Black hole singular- ity and timelike entanglement,

    T. Anegawa and K. Tamaoka, “Black hole singular- ity and timelike entanglement,” JHEP 10, 182 (2024) doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2024)182 [arXiv:2406.10968 [hep- th]]

    2024 arXiv

  31. [38]

    in 3d massive gravity living in the brane, which al- lows for an exact quantum BTZ (qBTZ) solution that is conjectured to be dual to thermal states in a 2d de- fect CFT living at the intersection of the brane and the boundary of the bulk AdS4. In the context of AdS3/CF T2, the...

  32. [39]

    New holographic generalization of entangle- ment entropy,

    Y. Nakata, T. Takayanagi, Y. Taki, K. Tamaoka and Z. Wei, “New holographic generalization of entangle- ment entropy,” Phys. Rev. D 103, no.2, 026005 (2021) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.026005 [arXiv:2005.13801 [hep-th]]

    2021 arXiv

  33. [40]

    On holographic timelike entanglement entropy,

    Z. Li, Z. Q. Xiao and R. Q. Yang, “On holographic timelike entanglement entropy,” JHEP 04, 004 (2023) doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2023)004 [arXiv:2211.14883 [hep- th]]

    2023 arXiv

  34. [41]

    Timelike entanglement entropy and phase transitions in non-conformal theories,

    M. Afrasiar, J. K. Basak and D. Giataganas, “Timelike entanglement entropy and phase transitions in non-conformal theories,” JHEP 07, 243 (2024) doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2024)243 [arXiv:2404.01393 [hep- th]]

    2024 arXiv

  35. [42]

    A duality of Ryu-Takayanagi sur- faces inside and outside the horizon,

    W. z. Guo and J. Xu, “A duality of Ryu-Takayanagi sur- faces inside and outside the horizon,” [arXiv:2502.16774 [hep-th]]

  36. [43]

    Holographic derivation of entanglement entropy from AdS/CFT,

    S. Ryu and T. Takayanagi, “Holographic derivation of entanglement entropy from AdS/CFT,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 181602 (2006) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.181602 [arXiv:hep-th/0603001 [hep-th]]

    2006 arXiv

  37. [44]

    Aspects of Holo- graphic Entanglement Entropy,

    S. Ryu and T. Takayanagi, “Aspects of Holo- graphic Entanglement Entropy,” JHEP 08, 045 (2006) doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2006/08/045 [arXiv:hep- th/0605073 [hep-th]]

    2006

  38. [45]

    timelike entangle- ment entropy in AdS/BCFT,

    C. S. Chu and H. Parihar, “timelike entangle- ment entropy in AdS/BCFT,” JHEP 06, 173 (2023) doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2023)173 [arXiv:2304.10907 [hep- th]]

    2023 arXiv

  39. [46]

    Holographic timelike entanglement and c theorem for supersymmetric QFTs in (0 + 1)d,

    D. Roychowdhury, “Holographic timelike entanglement and c theorem for supersymmetric QFTs in (0 + 1)d,” JHEP 06, 003 (2025) doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2025)003 [arXiv:2502.10797 [hep-th]]

    2025 arXiv

  40. [47]

    Narayan, Phys

    K. Narayan, Phys. Rev. D 107, no.12, 126004 (2023) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.126004 [arXiv:2210.12963 [hep-th]]

    2023 arXiv

  41. [48]

    Here, T measures the size of the (timelike) entangling region which should be treated as a timelike separation (or interval with T 2 < 0) in the Lorentzian signature

    that bypasses the analytic continuation ( T → iT ) and produces the correct results. Here, T measures the size of the (timelike) entangling region which should be treated as a timelike separation (or interval with T 2 < 0) in the Lorentzian signature. We introduce a parameter ...

    2025 arXiv

  42. [49]

    Tem- poral entanglement entropy as a probe of renor- malization group flow,

    S. Grieninger, K. Ikeda and D. E. Kharzeev, “Tem- poral entanglement entropy as a probe of renor- malization group flow,” JHEP 05, 030 (2024) doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2024)030 [arXiv:2312.08534 [hep- th]]

    2024 arXiv

  43. [50]

    Geo- metric Interpretation of Timelike Entanglement En- tropy,

    M. P. Heller, F. Ori and A. Serantes, “Geo- metric Interpretation of Timelike Entanglement En- tropy,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, no.13, 131601 (2025) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.131601 [arXiv:2408.15752 [hep-th]]

    2025 arXiv

  44. [51]

    Timelike Entangle- ment Entropy: a top-down approach,

    C. Nunez and D. Roychowdhury, “Timelike Entangle- ment Entropy: a top-down approach,” [arXiv:2505.20388 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  45. [52]

    Interpolating between Space-like and Time-like Entanglement via Holography,

    C. Nunez and D. Roychowdhury, “Interpolating between Space-like and Time-like Entanglement via Holography,” [arXiv:2507.17805 [hep-th]]

  46. [53]

    Israel, Singular hypersurfaces and thin shells in gen- eral relativity, Nuovo Cim

    W. Israel, Singular hypersurfaces and thin shells in gen- eral relativity, Nuovo Cim. B 44S10 (1966) 1

    1966

  47. [54]

    Central Charges in the Canonical Realization of Asymptotic Symme- tries: An Example from Three-Dimensional Grav- ity,

    J. D. Brown and M. Henneaux, “Central Charges in the Canonical Realization of Asymptotic Symme- tries: An Example from Three-Dimensional Grav- ity,” Commun. Math. Phys. 104, 207-226 (1986) doi:10.1007/BF01211590

    1986 doi

  48. [55]

    Central Charge for AdS(2) Quantum Gravity,

    T. Hartman and A. Strominger, “Central Charge for AdS(2) Quantum Gravity,” JHEP 04, 026 (2009) doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2009/04/026 [arXiv:0803.3621 [hep-th]]

    2009 arXiv

  49. [56]

    On the stability of multiscale models of dynamical sym- metry breaking from holography,

    A. F. Faedo, M. Piai and D. Schofield, “On the stability of multiscale models of dynamical sym- metry breaking from holography,” Nucl. Phys. B 880, 504-527 (2014) doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2014.01.016 [arXiv:1312.2793 [hep-th]]

    2014 arXiv

  50. [57]

    Wilson Loops in string duals of Walking and Flavored Systems,

    C. Nunez, M. Piai and A. Rago, “Wilson Loops in string duals of Walking and Flavored Systems,” Phys. Rev. D 81, 086001 (2010) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81.086001 [arXiv:0909.0748 [hep-th]]

    2010 arXiv

  51. [58]

    En- tanglement as a probe of confinement,

    I. R. Klebanov, D. Kutasov and A. Murugan, “En- tanglement as a probe of confinement,” Nucl. Phys. B 796, 274-293 (2008) doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2007.12.017 [arXiv:0709.2140 [hep-th]]

    2008 arXiv

  52. [59]

    Confinement, Phase Transi- tions and non-Locality in the Entanglement Entropy,

    U. Kol, C. Nunez, D. Schofield, J. Sonnenschein and M. Warschawski, “Confinement, Phase Transi- tions and non-Locality in the Entanglement Entropy,” JHEP 06, 005 (2014) doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2014)005 [arXiv:1403.2721 [hep-th]]

    2014 arXiv

  53. [60]

    AdS/BCFT and Island for curvature-squared gravity,

    Q. L. Hu, D. Li, R. X. Miao and Y. Q. Zeng, “AdS/BCFT and Island for curvature-squared gravity,” JHEP 09, 037 (2022) doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2022)037 [arXiv:2202.03304 [hep-th]]

    2022 arXiv

  54. [61]

    On entangle- ment c-functions in confining gauge field theories,

    N. Jokela, J. Kastikainen, C. Nunez, J. M. Pen ´ ın, H. Ruotsalainen and J. G. Subils, “On entangle- ment c-functions in confining gauge field theories,” [arXiv:2505.14397 [hep-th]]

  55. [62]

    A Refinement of entangle- ment entropy and the number of degrees of freedom,

    H. Liu and M. Mezei, “A Refinement of entangle- ment entropy and the number of degrees of freedom,” JHEP 04, 162 (2013) doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2013)162 [arXiv:1202.2070 [hep-th]]

    2013 arXiv

  56. [63]

    The reader is also referred to [11]-[23] for various other interesting developments that took place in recent years

    For a nice and comprehensive review, see [10]. The reader is also referred to [11]-[23] for various other interesting developments that took place in recent years

  57. [64]

    The C metric (1) describes an accelerating black hole in AdS4 that intersects the brane orthogonally

  58. [66]

    When the brane is placed at x = 0, its tension ( TB) goes inversely with l [4]

  59. [67]

    The real root signifies the existence of an extremal surface and has been considered in the computation

    Notice, while solving the constraint (31), one encounters two complex and one real root. The real root signifies the existence of an extremal surface and has been considered in the computation. On the other hand, for a given back- reaction (γ), one could probe deeper inside th...

  60. [68]

    By external perturbation, here we always refer to the effects due to quantum backreaction on the KR brane. 9

  61. [69]

    In Lorentzian λ = −1 signature, one has to consider the imaginary component of (35)

Pith tools

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