Boundary Carroll CFTs: SUSY and Superstrings

Arjun Bagchi; Priyadarshini Pandit; Pronoy Chakraborty; Ritankar Chatterjee; Shankhadeep Chakrabortty

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 58 references

Boundary Carroll CFTs: SUSY and Superstrings

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper constructs the first open null superstring with Dirichlet boundary conditions and identifies its residual worldsheet symmetry as the homogeneous Boundary Superconformal Carroll Algebra.

desk verdict Solid extension work with a real new algebra and first open null superstring, but the mode-level bracket check in §6.4 doesn't close as printed and should be fixed before the headline claim is trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.20165 v1 pith:5ZPW5UR3 submitted 2025-08-27 hep-th

Arjun Bagchi , Shankhadeep Chakrabortty , Pronoy Chakraborty , Ritankar Chatterjee , Priyadarshini Pandit This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-th

keywords CarrollianconformalfieldtheoryboundarysuperconformalalgebranullstringtensionlesssuperstringworldsheetsymmetryDirichletconditionssuper-Virasorocontractionopen

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 supersymmetric Carrollian conformal field theories with boundaries come in two variants—homogeneous and inhomogeneous—and that one of them, the homogeneous Boundary Superconformal Carroll Algebra (BSCCA), is realized as the residual symmetry on the worldsheet of a newly constructed open null superstring. Carrollian symmetries govern physics when the speed of light is sent to zero, i.e. on lightlike surfaces; a null (tensionless) string sweeps out such a surface and is the string-theory analogue of a massless particle. The paper argues that an open null superstring can be defined with Dirichlet boundary conditions, that the boundary extends to superspace at {σ=0, θ2=0} and {σ=π, θ1=0}, and that the surviving generators O_n, P_n and H_r close into the homogeneous BSCCA, both intrinsically and as a Carrollian limit of the tensile open superstring. If right, this supplies the first supersymmetric boundary extension of the bosonic boundary Carroll CFT and opens the open-string sector of tensionless superstrings to the same algebraic treatment as the closed sector.

What carries the argument

The central object is the homogeneous Boundary Superconformal Carroll Algebra (BSCCA), generated by three families: bosonic superrotations O_n = L_n − L_{−n}, supertranslations P_n = M_n + M_{−n}, and fermionic generators H_r = Q^+_r + Q^-_{-r}, with r half-integer in the Neveu-Schwarz sector. Its role is to encode the residual worldsheet symmetry after Dirichlet boundaries and superspace boundaries are imposed. The key structural identity is that the basis (O, P, H, I) forces a choice: the anticommutator {H_r, I_s} = R_{r+s} reintroduces the bosonic generator R_n = M_n − M_{−n}, which is not part of the boundary algebra, so exactly one fermionic combination survives. The superspace boundary

What would settle it

Compute the ε→0 limit of the boundary-compatible super-Virasoro generators starting from the tensile open superstring in superspace with the Dirichlet NS boundary at {σ=0, θ2=0} and {σ=π, θ1=0}, using the homogeneous scaling τ→ετ, σ→σ, θ1→√ε θ1, θ2→√ε θ2. If the limiting vector fields contain ∂θ1 or ∂σ terms at either boundary—equivalently, if the boundary location moves—the claimed survival of H_r is wrong. Independently, compute the anticommutator {H_r, H_s} from the mode-expanded generators with normal ordering; any term beyond P_{r+s} plus the standard central term would falsify the algebr

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that boundaries can be introduced consistently into two-dimensional superconformal Carrollian field theories, producing two closed boundary algebras—the Homogeneous BSCCA and the Inhomogeneous BSCCA—and that the homogeneous one is realized as the worldsheet symmetry algebra of the first constructed open null superstring. The construction imposes Dirichlet boundary conditions at σ=0 and σ=π, extends them to the superspace locations {σ=0, θ2=0} and {σ=π, θ1=0}, and shows that only the fermionic combination H_r = Q^+_r + Q^-_{-r} survives these boundaries, while I_r = Q^+_r − Q^-_{-r} is excluded. The bosonic boundary generators are O_n = L_n −

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the superspace boundary is unchanged by the tensionless limit: the tensile Neveu-Schwarz boundaries {σ=0, θ2=0} and {σ=π, θ1=0} are imported into the null theory, and if the Grassmann boundary coordinates shift under the Carrollian contraction, the surviving fermionic generator would change from H to I and the BSCCA realization would fail.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The Dirichlet open null superstring is a consistent classical worldsheet theory: its mode expansion and constraint algebra realize the homogeneous BSCCA, so the boundary algebra is the actual residual gauge symmetry of a string theory, not just a field-theoretic construction.
The homogeneous BSCCA arises both intrinsically and as a one-parameter Carrollian contraction of a single copy of the super-Virasoro algebra, so tensile and null open superstrings are connected by a definite limiting procedure.
The same boundary-superspace method yields the Ramond-sector generators: with boundaries at {σ=0, θ2=0} and {σ=π, θ2=0}, the surviving fermionic generators are again H_r, now with integer r.
The inhomogeneous BSCCA is less rich than its homogeneous counterpart—its fermionic generators anticommute to zero—so the open null superstring built from the homogeneous sector is the more interesting object; alternative boundary placements could change this.

Reading between the lines

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

A natural next step is to quantize the open null superstring and ask which of the three closed-null-string vacua (induced, flipped, oscillator) survive the Dirichlet boundary; the mode algebra given in the paper is the required input for that calculation.
The paper sets aside a purely null boundary condition n_α V^α=0 that is automatically satisfied in its gauge; exploring it could realize the closed-to-open transition of tensionless strings directly on the worldsheet, rather than through Dirichlet floors.
The Dirichlet open null superstring should describe Carrollian D-branes; constructing boundary states and matching the BSCCA to target-space brane geometry would test whether all tensionless D-branes are necessarily null.
For the inhomogeneous sector, a quantum calculation of the anticommutators after normal ordering could change the classical verdict that the fermionic generators are inert; the paper's contraction argument is algebraic, not quantum.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Quick take: this is a solid extension paper that does what it says—two boundary superconformal Carroll algebras and a first pass at an open null superstring—but the mode-level derivation that is supposed to anchor the headline claim has a normalization problem and some index typos. I would send it to a referee, not desk-reject, but the authors should be asked to fix Section 6.4 before the claim is taken as established.

What's genuinely new: the BSCCA_H and BSCCA_I constructions from field-theoretic limits, and the explicit D-brane-like boundary analysis for null superstrings, including the superspace boundary locations and the survival of H_r vs I_r. The vector-field computation in 6.3 is clear and does close on the algebra (6.33). The limiting checks in 6.5, from both mode and superspace directions, are a nice cross-check. Credit where due: this is honest, careful work, mostly.

Soft spots, in order of severity. First, Section 6.4 does not deliver what the abstract promises. The mode definitions in (6.40) with the stated normalizations do not satisfy (6.33). Using [C,C]=2m δ and {β,β}=δ, one gets {H_r,H_s}=2P_{r+s}, not P_{r+s}; either H or P is off by a factor of 2. The algebra is asserted, not computed, and equations (6.39b), (6.40a), (6.50a) have dangling indices in the fermionic sums (r±n with n undefined). These are fixable typos, but the section is the load-bearing link between the open superstring and the BSCCA, so it cannot be left as is. Second, the assumption in 6.3 that the tensile superspace boundary survives the Carrollian limit is stated, not proven; the limiting argument in 6.5 only zooms around θ=0 and doesn't fully discharge the concern. I think the assumption is plausible, but it should be labeled as an assumption or proven. Third, the 'first open null superstring' priority claim would be stronger with a direct sentence comparing to [39] and [42], which appear in the bibliography but are not discussed; the reader should be told what those papers do and do not contain.

Bottom line: the field-theory half of the paper is in good shape, and the superspace analysis is credible. The string-theory half needs a corrected and explicit bracket computation. This is referee-able; I'd engage with it after revision.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper has two main parts. In the first part (Sections 2–4) the authors construct two boundary versions of two-dimensional superconformal Carrollian algebras, the Homogeneous and Inhomogeneous BSCCA, starting from the known superconformal Carrollian algebras and from Inönü–Wigner contractions of a single super-Virasoro algebra. In the second part (Sections 5–6) they construct an open null superstring with Dirichlet boundary conditions and claim that the residual worldsheet symmetry is the Homogeneous BSCCA. The construction combines the bosonic open null string of [17] with the homogeneous closed null superstring of [26], imports the tensile superspace boundary locations {σ=0, θ2=0} and {σ=π, θ1=0}, and identifies the boundary-preserving generators O_n, P_n, H_r. The paper also contains a tensionless-limit analysis from the tensile open superstring. The central claim is that the worldsheet of this open null superstring realizes, through the mode constraints, the Homogeneous BSCCA of Eq. (6.33)/(4.4).

Significance. If the mode-level realization is made fully correct, the paper would provide the first explicit construction of an open null superstring and a nontrivial worldsheet application of boundary superconformal Carrollian symmetry. The superspace vector-field analysis in Section 6.3 is explicit and largely convincing: the selection of the H_r combination as the boundary-compatible fermionic generator in the Neveu–Schwarz sector follows from a clean inspection of Eq. (6.31), and the algebra (6.33) is credible. The authors also deserve credit for transparently stating the assumption in Section 6.3 that the tensile superspace boundary survives the Carrollian limit and for providing a consistency check via the scaling (6.52). However, the constraint-algebra derivation in Section 6.4, which is one of the two supports for the central claim, is not reproducible as written: there are undefined indices, a normalization mismatch in the H_r bracket, and inconsistent mode commutators. These are load-bearing issues rather than cosmetic typos, because the relation {H_r,H_s}=P_{r+s} is part of the defining BSCCA structure.

major comments (3)

[§6.4, Eqs. (6.39b), (6.40a), (6.39c)] The fermionic sums in (6.39b) and (6.40a) contain undefined indices: terms such as (2r+p)(β^+_{-r}β^+_{r+n}) and (2r−p)(β^+_{-r}β^+_{r−n}) have an index n that is not summed over and is not otherwise specified. This makes the displayed expression for O_p ill-defined and prevents the reader from checking the advertised algebra. In the same subsection, Eq. (6.39c) writes the Fourier mode as e^{-irσ}, while the product ψ_+·\dot X carries frequencies e^{-i(r+n)σ}; the coefficient displayed is therefore not the Fourier coefficient of the current unless a nontrivial reindexing is supplied. The equality ψ_+·\dot X = ψ_-·\dot X is also asserted without explanation; using (6.36) the two sides are not manifestly equal. These issues must be repaired before the mode derivation can be evaluated.
[§6.4, Eqs. (5.13), (6.38), (6.33)] The normalization of the mode algebra is internally inconsistent. Eq. (5.13) gives [C^ν_n, C^μ_m] = n δ_{n,-m} η^{μν}, while Eq. (6.38) gives [C^μ_m, C^ν_n] = 2m δ_{m+n} η^{μν} for what is nominally the same C_n oscillator. This factor of two already changes all subsequent brackets. More seriously, using (6.38) and the displayed definitions (6.40b),(6.40c), set A_n≡C_n−C_{−n}. Then [A_m,A_n]=0, P_p=1/4∑_n A_n A_{p−n}, and H_r=2^{-1/2}∑_n A_n β_{r+n}. With {β_r,β_s}=δ_{r+s}, one obtains {H_r,H_s}=1/2∑_n A_n A_{−r−s−n}=2P_{r+s}, not P_{r+s} as required by (6.33) and (4.4). Thus, as printed, the fermionic generators do not realize the BSCCA in the H-sector; either H_r, P_p, or the β normalization must be changed. This is a central structural relation, not a convention detail.
[§6.5, Eq. (6.50b)] The limiting expressions do not follow from the stated substitution. Plugging (6.49a) into (6.40b), and using C_n−C_{−n}=√ε(α_n−α_{−n}), gives P_n = (ε/4)∑_p (α_p−α_{−p})·(α_{n−p}−α_{p−n}) up to ordering. The printed P_n = (ε/4)∑_p (α_p·α_{n−p}+α_{−p}·α_{p−n}) is not equivalent to this expression. Similarly, the fermionic term in (6.50a) contains a free index p in the summand with no summation, and the r+n vs r−n structure is unexplained. Since the contraction is claimed as a check of the intrinsic construction, please recompute the (6.50) generators and display at least one representative bracket to demonstrate that the BSCCA (6.33) is reproduced.

minor comments (6)

[§6, constraints] The notation ψ_+, ψ_−, and \barψ is not defined in the gauge-fixed constraints (6.9b), (6.39b), and (6.39c). Please specify the two-component spinor convention and the contraction used in terms such as \barψ·ψ′.
[§6.4] The text after (6.40) states that the mode brackets recover (6.33), but no calculation is shown. Even apart from the normalization issue, please provide at least the key bracket {H_r,H_s} and one [O,H] commutator so the reader can verify the claimed closure.
[§6.5] The sentence comparing the scaled modes to the intrinsic modes refers to '(6.41)' although the scaled expansions are displayed in (6.48). Please correct the cross-reference.
[§4.2] The color-coded 'red' brackets in Eqs. (4.3f) and (4.11) are not print-friendly; please name the offending brackets explicitly (e.g., {H_r,I_s}=R_{r+s}) rather than relying on color.
[§6.4 and §6.5] The central terms of the BSCCA, which appear in the field-theoretic algebra (4.4), are omitted in the string mode algebra (6.33) without comment. Please state whether the string realization is classical/centerless or whether central terms have not yet been computed.
[Overall] There are several typos and unfinished accented names, e.g., 'superstings' in Section 7 and repeated 'In¨on¨u-Wigner' artifacts. A careful proofreading pass is needed.

Circularity Check

3 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The BSCCA is substantially engineered into the open null superstring: the limiting fermion scaling is justified by the target algebra, and the mode-level proof of the central claim is asserted rather than demonstrated; however, the vector-field and field-theory algebra computations carry independent content.

fitted input called prediction [Sec. 6.5, eq. (6.47)]
"In addition, it is essential to specify the scaling behaviour of the fermionic fields in the tensionless superstring limit. Given that the underlying symmetry is governed by the homogeneous BSCCA, the fermions scale homogeneously as ψtensionless = √ϵ ψtensile."

The limiting analysis is presented as showing that the tensile open superstring 'emerges' as the null theory with homogeneous BSCCA symmetry. The fermion scaling is the input that selects which contracted algebra is obtained; justifying that scaling by the very algebra the limit is meant to produce means the target is used to fix the limit. The same scaling can be motivated independently by the field-theory contraction (4.8), but the paper's stated justification here is the target algebra itself.
other [Sec. 6.3, after eq. (6.28)]
"Here we have assumed that the boundary locations in the superspace are not affected by the homogeneous Carrollian limit on the superspace. The assumptions will be justified once we look into the limiting study of this theory."

This assumption is load-bearing: the choice of superspace boundary at {σ=0, θ2=0} and {σ=π, θ1=0} is exactly what eliminates the I_r generators and leaves H_r, producing the homogeneous BSCCA. The boundary is imported from the tensile RNS open superstring rather than derived from the null-string action, so the advertised 'realisation' of BSCCA is conditional on an external input rather than an independent prediction. The later justification in Sec. 6.5 ('we only zoom around θ1=θ2=0') is a continuity argument, not a derivation.

1 more flagged steps

other [Sec. 6.4, after eq. (6.40)]
"Using the commutation and anticommutation relations satisfied by these bosonic and fermionic modes as mentioned in (6.38), we recover the homogeneous BSCCA (6.33)."

This is the mode-level support for the central claim, but no bracket computation is displayed. With the printed definitions H_r = 2^{-1/2} Σ_n A_n β_{r+n} and P_p = 4^{-1} Σ_n A_n A_{p-n}, A_n=C_n-C_{-n} and {β_r,β_s}=δ_{r+s}, one obtains {H_r,H_s}=2P_{r+s}, not P_{r+s} as required by (6.33)/(4.4). The asserted recovery is therefore not demonstrated as written; this is an omitted proof (and apparent normalization mismatch) at the exact point where the string is claimed to realize the BSCCA.

full rationale

The paper does not reduce entirely to a definitional identity: the field-theory BSCCA in Sec. 4 is derived by an explicit contraction of a single super-Virasoro copy, and Sec. 6.3 does compute which combinations of the superspace vector fields survive a specified boundary. Those are genuine algebraic computations. However, the string-theoretic 'realisation' is substantially built in. The superspace boundary that selects H over I is imported from the tensile open superstring (Sec. 6.3), and in the limiting analysis the fermion scaling is justified by the very homogeneous BSCCA the limit is supposed to produce (Sec. 6.5, eq. (6.47)). Moreover, the mode-expansion proof in Sec. 6.4—the only direct string-level demonstration that the constraints close to BSCCA—is asserted rather than shown, and with the printed normalizations the stated bracket would give {H_r,H_s}=2P_{r+s}, not P_{r+s}. That is a correctness gap rather than a circular step, but it means the central claim currently rests on an unverified link. Self-citations to [17] and [26] are present but not load-bearing, since the relevant algebras are rederived in the paper. Overall this is a moderate, partially engineered emergence: score 4 rather than a higher value.

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

The central claims rest on standard super Virasoro algebra and contraction methods plus domain assumptions about the null superstring action, the choice of Dirichlet boundaries, the superspace boundary locations, and the gamma matrix representation. No free parameters are fitted; the contraction parameter ϵ is a limit, and central charges are left undetermined. No new physical entities (particles, forces, dimensions) are postulated.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption The tensionless superstring action (6.1) and gauge fixing V^a=(1,0), χ=0 correctly describe null superstrings.
Section 6.1 introduces this action from [58] and the gauge; the entire string construction rests on it.
domain assumption The boundary locations in superspace are unchanged by the homogeneous Carrollian limit.
Stated in Section 6.3 ('we have assumed that the boundary locations in the superspace are not affected by the homogeneous Carrollian limit'); used to import the tensile NS boundaries {σ=0, θ2=0} and {σ=π, θ1=0} into the null theory.
domain assumption Dirichlet boundary conditions, rather than Neumann or null conditions, define the open null superstring.
Section 5.2/6.2 selects Dirichlet to connect to BCCA/BSCCA and to the tensile open string; the other conditions are deferred.
domain assumption The representation ρ^α = V^α 1 solves the degenerate Clifford algebra (6.6).
Section 6.1 uses this to derive the superspace generators; the validity of this representation is assumed.
standard math Super Virasoro algebra and Inönü-Wigner contraction procedures are standard.
Used throughout Sections 2-4 to build Carrollian and boundary algebras.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Boundary Carroll CFTs: SUSY and Superstrings." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5ZPW5UR3

@misc{pith2026250820165,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Boundary Carroll CFTs: SUSY and Superstrings},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5ZPW5UR3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.20165}
}

read the original abstract

We consider two dimensional superconformal Carrollian theories with boundaries and construct two variants of the Boundary Superconformal Carrollian Algebra (BSCCA), viz. the Homogeneous and the Inhomogeneous, by making appropriate identification of the parent superconformal Carrollian algebras. These new algebras are then recovered by appropriate limits of a single copy of Super Virasoro algebra. We then focus on the theory of null tensionless superstrings and construct, for the first time, an open null superstring. The Homogeneous version of the BSCCA is realised as worldsheet symmetries on this open null superstring.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

[39]

B. Chen, Z. Hu, Z.-f. Yu, and Y.-f. Zheng, Path-integral quantization of tensionless (super) string, arXiv:2302.0597. – 43 –

work page arXiv
[42]

Chen and Z

B. Chen and Z. Hu, Carrollian superstring in the flipped vacuum , Phys. Rev. D 112 (2025), no. 4 046005, [ arXiv:2501.1101]

work page arXiv 2025
[17]

Bagchi, P

A. Bagchi, P. Chakraborty, S. Chakrabortty, S. Fredenhagen, D. Grumiller, and P. Pandit, Boundary Carrollian Conformal Field Theories and Open Null Strings , Phys. Rev. Lett. 134 (2025), no. 7 071604, [ arXiv:2409.0109]

work page arXiv 2025
[26]

Bagchi, S

A. Bagchi, S. Chakrabortty, and P. Parekh, Tensionless Superstrings: View from the Worldsheet, JHEP 10 (2016) 113, [ arXiv:1606.0962]

work page arXiv 2016
[1]

Bagchi, Correspondence between Asymptotically Flat Spacetimes and Nonrelativistic Conformal Field Theories , Phys

A. Bagchi, Correspondence between Asymptotically Flat Spacetimes and Nonrelativistic Conformal Field Theories , Phys. Rev. Lett. 105 (2010) 171601, [ arXiv:1006.3354]

arXiv 2010
[2]

Bagchi, R

A. Bagchi, R. Basu, A. Kakkar, and A. Mehra, Flat Holography: Aspects of the dual field theory, JHEP 12 (2016) 147, [ arXiv:1609.0620]

work page arXiv 2016
[3]

Donnay, A

L. Donnay, A. Fiorucci, Y. Herfray, and R. Ruzziconi, Carrollian Perspective on Celestial Holography, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129 (2022), no. 7 071602, [ arXiv:2202.0470]

work page arXiv 2022
[4]

Bagchi, S

A. Bagchi, S. Banerjee, R. Basu, and S. Dutta, Scattering Amplitudes: Celestial and Carrollian, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128 (2022), no. 24 241601, [ arXiv:2202.0843]

work page arXiv 2022

Show all 58 references

[5]

Donnay, A

L. Donnay, A. Fiorucci, Y. Herfray, and R. Ruzziconi, Bridging Carrollian and celestial holography, Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023), no. 12 126027, [ arXiv:2212.1255]

2023
[6]

Bagchi, P

A. Bagchi, P. Dhivakar, and S. Dutta, AdS Witten diagrams to Carrollian correlators , JHEP 04 (2023) 135, [ arXiv:2303.0738]

2023
[7]

Donnay and C

L. Donnay and C. Marteau, Carrollian Physics at the Black Hole Horizon , Class. Quant. Grav. 36 (2019), no. 16 165002, [ arXiv:1903.0965]

2019
[8]

Duval, G

C. Duval, G. W. Gibbons, and P. A. Horvathy, Conformal Carroll groups and BMS symmetry, Class. Quant. Grav. 31 (2014) 092001, [ arXiv:1402.5894]

2014 arXiv
[9]

Duval, G

C. Duval, G. W. Gibbons, and P. A. Horvathy, Conformal Carroll groups , J. Phys. A47 (2014), no. 33 335204, [ arXiv:1403.4213]

2014 arXiv
[10]

Bidussi, J

L. Bidussi, J. Hartong, E. Have, J. Musaeus, and S. Prohazka, Fractons, dipole symmetries and curved spacetime, SciPost Phys. 12 (2022), no. 6 205, [ arXiv:2111.0366]

2022
[11]

Bagchi, A

A. Bagchi, A. Banerjee, R. Basu, M. Islam, and S. Mondal, Magic fermions: Carroll and flat bands, JHEP 03 (2023) 227, [ arXiv:2211.1164]

2023
[12]

Biswas, A

S. Biswas, A. Dubey, S. Mondal, A. Banerjee, A. Kundu, and A. Bagchi, Carroll at Phase Separation, arXiv:2501.1642
[13]

Bagchi, K

A. Bagchi, K. S. Kolekar, and A. Shukla, Carrollian Origins of Bjorken Flow , Phys. Rev. Lett. 130 (2023), no. 24 241601, [ arXiv:2302.0305]

2023
[14]

Bagchi, K

A. Bagchi, K. S. Kolekar, T. Mandal, and A. Shukla, Heavy-ion collisions, Gubser flow, and Carroll hydrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024), no. 5 056004, [ arXiv:2310.0316]

2024
[15]

de Boer, J

J. de Boer, J. Hartong, N. A. Obers, W. Sybesma, and S. Vandoren, Carroll Symmetry, Dark Energy and Inflation , Front. in Phys. 10 (2022) 810405, [ arXiv:2110.0231]

2022
[16]

Bagchi, A

A. Bagchi, A. Banerjee, P. Dhivakar, S. Mondal, and A. Shukla, The Carrollian Kaleidoscope, arXiv:2506.1616
[18]

Affleck, A Current Algebra Approach to the Kondo Effect , Nucl

I. Affleck, A Current Algebra Approach to the Kondo Effect , Nucl. Phys. B 336 (1990) 517–532

1990
[19]

Affleck and A

I. Affleck and A. W. W. Ludwig, Critical theory of overscreened Kondo fixed points , Nucl. Phys. B 360 (1991) 641–696. – 42 –

1991
[20]

B. J. van Wees, H. van Houten, C. W. J. Beenakker, J. G. Williamson, L. P. Kouwenhoven, D. van der Marel, and C. T. Foxon, Quantized conductance of point contacts in a two-dimensional electron gas , Phys. Rev. Lett. 60 (1988) 848–850

1988
[21]

Johannesson, N

H. Johannesson, N. Andrei, and C. J. Bolech, Critical theory of the two-channel anderson impurity model, Phys. Rev. B68 (2003) 075112, [ 0301158]

2003
[22]

Takayanagi, Holographic Dual of BCFT , Phys

T. Takayanagi, Holographic Dual of BCFT , Phys. Rev. Lett. 107 (2011) 101602, [arXiv:1105.5165]

2011 arXiv
[23]

Fujita, T

M. Fujita, T. Takayanagi, and E. Tonni, Aspects of AdS/BCFT, JHEP 11 (2011) 043, [arXiv:1108.5152]

2011 arXiv
[24]

Barnich, L

G. Barnich, L. Donnay, J. Matulich, and R. Troncoso, Asymptotic symmetries and dynamics of three-dimensional flat supergravity, JHEP 08 (2014) 071, [ arXiv:1407.4275]

2014 arXiv
[25]

Lodato and W

I. Lodato and W. Merbis, Super-BMS3 algebras from N = 2 flat supergravities, JHEP 11 (2016) 150, [ arXiv:1610.0750]

2016
[27]

Bagchi, A

A. Bagchi, A. Banerjee, S. Chakrabortty, and P. Parekh, Inhomogeneous Tensionless Superstrings, JHEP 02 (2018) 065, [ arXiv:1710.0348]

2018
[28]

Bagchi, A

A. Bagchi, A. Banerjee, S. Chakrabortty, and P. Parekh, Exotic Origins of Tensionless Superstrings, Phys. Lett. B 801 (2020) 135139, [ arXiv:1811.1087]

2020
[29]

Bagchi, D

A. Bagchi, D. Grumiller, and P. Nandi, Carrollian superconformal theories and super BMS , JHEP 05 (2022) 044, [ arXiv:2202.0117]

2022
[30]

Zheng and B

Y.-f. Zheng and B. Chen, Structure of Carrollian (conformal) superalgebra , JHEP 08 (2025) 111, [arXiv:2503.2216]

2025
[31]

Zheng, Supersymmetric BMS4 Algebras Revisited: Electric/Magnetic Superalgebras and Free Field Realization, arXiv:2508.1792

Y.-f. Zheng, Supersymmetric BMS4 Algebras Revisited: Electric/Magnetic Superalgebras and Free Field Realization, arXiv:2508.1792
[32]

Bagchi, Tensionless Strings and Galilean Conformal Algebra , JHEP 05 (2013) 141, [arXiv:1303.0291]

A. Bagchi, Tensionless Strings and Galilean Conformal Algebra , JHEP 05 (2013) 141, [arXiv:1303.0291]

2013 arXiv
[33]

Schild, Classical Null Strings , Phys

A. Schild, Classical Null Strings , Phys. Rev. D16 (1977) 1722

1977
[34]

Isberg, U

J. Isberg, U. Lindstrom, B. Sundborg, and G. Theodoridis, Classical and quantized tensionless strings , Nucl. Phys. B411 (1994) 122–156, [ hep-th/9307108]

1994 arXiv
[35]

Casali and P

E. Casali and P. Tourkine, On the null origin of the ambitwistor string , JHEP 11 (2016) 036, [arXiv:1606.0563]

2016
[36]

Bagchi, A

A. Bagchi, A. Banerjee, S. Chakrabortty, S. Dutta, and P. Parekh, A tale of three — tensionless strings and vacuum structure , JHEP 04 (2020) 061, [ arXiv:2001.0035]

2020
[37]

Bagchi, M

A. Bagchi, M. Mandlik, and P. Sharma, Tensionless tales: vacua and critical dimensions , JHEP 08 (2021) 054, [ arXiv:2105.0968]

2021
[38]

Bagchi, A

A. Bagchi, A. Banerjee, and P. Parekh, Tensionless Path from Closed to Open Strings , Phys. Rev. Lett. 123 (2019), no. 11 111601, [ arXiv:1905.1173]

2019
[40]

Banerjee, R

A. Banerjee, R. Chatterjee, and P. Pandit, Tensionless tales of compactification, JHEP 09 (2023) 050, [ arXiv:2307.0127]

2023
[41]

Banerjee, R

A. Banerjee, R. Chatterjee, and P. Pandit, Tensionless strings in a Kalb-Ramond background, JHEP 06 (2024) 067, [ arXiv:2404.0138]

2024
[43]

Levy-Leblond, Une nouvelle limite non-relativiste du group de Poincare , Ann

J. Levy-Leblond, Une nouvelle limite non-relativiste du group de Poincare , Ann. Inst. H. Poincare 3 (1965) 1

1965
[44]

N. D. Sen Gupta, On an analogue of the Galilei group , Nuovo Cim. A 44 (1966), no. 2 512–517

1966
[45]

Barnich and G

G. Barnich and G. Compere, Classical central extension for asymptotic symmetries at null infinity in three spacetime dimensions , Class. Quant. Grav. 24 (2007) F15–F23, [gr-qc/0610130]

2007 arXiv
[46]

Bondi, M

H. Bondi, M. G. J. van der Burg, and A. W. K. Metzner, Gravitational waves in general relativity. 7. Waves from axisymmetric isolated systems , Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A269 (1962) 21–52

1962
[47]

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

1962
[48]

Duval, G

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

2014 arXiv
[49]

Bagchi, S

A. Bagchi, S. Chakrabortty, and P. Parekh, Tensionless Strings from Worldsheet Symmetries, JHEP 01 (2016) 158, [ arXiv:1507.0436]

2016
[50]

Bagchi, A

A. Bagchi, A. Banerjee, and S. Chakrabortty, Rindler Physics on the String Worldsheet , Phys. Rev. Lett. 126 (2021), no. 3 031601, [ arXiv:2009.0140]

2021
[51]

Sagnotti, Notes on Strings and Higher Spins , J

A. Sagnotti, Notes on Strings and Higher Spins , J. Phys. A 46 (2013) 214006, [arXiv:1112.4285]

2013 arXiv
[52]

Sagnotti and M

A. Sagnotti and M. Tsulaia, On higher spins and the tensionless limit of string theory , Nucl. Phys. B 682 (2004) 83–116, [ hep-th/0311257]

2004 arXiv
[53]

Bonelli, On the tensionless limit of bosonic strings, infinite symmetries and higher spins , Nucl

G. Bonelli, On the tensionless limit of bosonic strings, infinite symmetries and higher spins , Nucl. Phys. B 669 (2003) 159–172, [ hep-th/0305155]

2003 arXiv
[54]

Lindstrom and M

U. Lindstrom and M. Zabzine, Tensionless strings, WZW models at critical level and massless higher spin fields , Phys. Lett. B 584 (2004) 178–185, [ hep-th/0305098]

2004 arXiv
[55]

Bakas and C

I. Bakas and C. Sourdis, On the tensionless limit of gauged WZW models , JHEP 06 (2004) 049, [hep-th/0403165]

2004 arXiv
[56]

Francia, J

D. Francia, J. Mourad, and A. Sagnotti, Current Exchanges and Unconstrained Higher Spins, Nucl. Phys. B 773 (2007) 203–237, [ hep-th/0701163]

2007 arXiv
[57]

Lindstrom, B

U. Lindstrom, B. Sundborg, and G. Theodoridis, The Zero tension limit of the superstring , Phys. Lett. B 253 (1991) 319–323

1991
[58]

Lindstrom, B

U. Lindstrom, B. Sundborg, and G. Theodoridis, The Zero tension limit of the spinning string, Phys. Lett. B 258 (1991) 331–334. – 44 –

1991

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [39]

B. Chen, Z. Hu, Z.-f. Yu, and Y.-f. Zheng, Path-integral quantization of tensionless (super) string, arXiv:2302.0597. – 43 –

work page arXiv

[2] [42]

Chen and Z

B. Chen and Z. Hu, Carrollian superstring in the flipped vacuum , Phys. Rev. D 112 (2025), no. 4 046005, [ arXiv:2501.1101]

work page arXiv 2025

[3] [17]

Bagchi, P

A. Bagchi, P. Chakraborty, S. Chakrabortty, S. Fredenhagen, D. Grumiller, and P. Pandit, Boundary Carrollian Conformal Field Theories and Open Null Strings , Phys. Rev. Lett. 134 (2025), no. 7 071604, [ arXiv:2409.0109]

work page arXiv 2025

[4] [26]

Bagchi, S

A. Bagchi, S. Chakrabortty, and P. Parekh, Tensionless Superstrings: View from the Worldsheet, JHEP 10 (2016) 113, [ arXiv:1606.0962]

work page arXiv 2016

[5] [1]

Bagchi, Correspondence between Asymptotically Flat Spacetimes and Nonrelativistic Conformal Field Theories , Phys

A. Bagchi, Correspondence between Asymptotically Flat Spacetimes and Nonrelativistic Conformal Field Theories , Phys. Rev. Lett. 105 (2010) 171601, [ arXiv:1006.3354]

arXiv 2010

[6] [2]

Bagchi, R

A. Bagchi, R. Basu, A. Kakkar, and A. Mehra, Flat Holography: Aspects of the dual field theory, JHEP 12 (2016) 147, [ arXiv:1609.0620]

work page arXiv 2016

[7] [3]

Donnay, A

L. Donnay, A. Fiorucci, Y. Herfray, and R. Ruzziconi, Carrollian Perspective on Celestial Holography, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129 (2022), no. 7 071602, [ arXiv:2202.0470]

work page arXiv 2022

[8] [4]

Bagchi, S

A. Bagchi, S. Banerjee, R. Basu, and S. Dutta, Scattering Amplitudes: Celestial and Carrollian, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128 (2022), no. 24 241601, [ arXiv:2202.0843]

work page arXiv 2022