Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 57 references

The paper argues that bulk field theory in AdS/CFT resolves distances only down to the AdS radius; the bulk algebra emerges only in a double-scaling limit in which both the boundary cutoff and N go to infinity.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 10:32 UTC pith:NPXHD5XB

load-bearing objection A genuinely critical paper that makes a real case against Leutheusser–Liu's subalgebra duality, but the 'never sub-AdS QFT' conclusion goes beyond what its conjectural TNRG and omitted calculation can support. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2601.09621 v4 pith:NPXHD5XB submitted 2026-01-14 hep-th gr-qc

Diamonds in the Bulk and Large-N Scaling in AdS/CFT

Sidan A , Tom Banks This is my paper
classification hep-th gr-qc
keywords AdS/CFTcausal diamondstensor network renormalizationlarge-N limitvon Neumann algebrasbulk localitydouble-scaling limitnear-horizon CFT
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

Recent work identified Type III_1 von Neumann subalgebras of the large-N CFT algebra with the algebra of bulk local fields inside causal diamonds. This paper argues that at any finite boundary cutoff, those subalgebras describe a 1+1-dimensional near-horizon conformal field theory on the stretched horizon of the diamond, not bulk fields. The bulk field algebra appears only in a double-scaling limit in which the boundary UV cutoff, equivalently a volume cutoff on global AdS slices, is taken to infinity together with N. If correct, there is no bulk QFT description that resolves distances smaller than the AdS radius, and sub-AdS-radius locality is not a feature of AdS/CFT.

Core claim

Using a tensor network renormalization group (TNRG) lattice regularization of the boundary CFT, the paper shows that the central node of the network — the node corresponding to a causal diamond of size somewhat smaller than the AdS radius — contains only zero-orbital-angular-momentum modes. In the near-horizon limit, the free-field equations for scalar, Dirac, vector, and tensor fields all reduce to massless 1+1-dimensional equations. The paper concludes that the Type III_1 diamond subalgebras defined at N=∞ should be interpreted as algebras of a near-horizon 1+1-dimensional CFT, not of bulk fields in the diamond. The bulk field algebra emerges only when the boundary UV cutoff is taken to in

What carries the argument

The central object is the tensor network renormalization group (TNRG) sequence of lattice approximations to the boundary CFT; each shell of the network corresponds to the boundary of a causal diamond along a central geodesic, and the central node captures only s-wave (zero angular momentum) modes. The load-bearing identity is the reduction, in the near-horizon limit, of the free-field equations for all spins to the massless 1+1-dimensional wave equation. This reduction converts the CFT Hamiltonian into the generator of a 1+1D conformal system on the stretched horizon, and the double-scaling limit is what is needed to recover bulk locality.

Load-bearing premise

The derivation rests on the conjecture that the lattice Hamiltonians in the tensor network converge to the CFT Hamiltonian K0+P0; if the network does not capture the soft-graviton states responsible for the large central charge, the central-node spectrum is not the CFT spectrum.

What would settle it

A concrete falsifier: show that at finite cutoff and at N=∞ there is a Type III_1 subalgebra for a fixed bulk diamond that contains operators with nonzero orbital angular momentum on the transverse sphere, or whose modular Hamiltonian reproduces bulk QFT rather than a 1+1D near-horizon system.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Type III_1 diamond subalgebras at N=∞ describe a near-horizon 1+1D conformal system, so their modular properties and entropy fluctuations belong to that system, not to bulk QFT.
  • Sub-AdS-radius locality is absent in AdS/CFT: no bulk QFT resolves distances below the AdS radius.
  • The bulk field algebra is recovered only when the boundary UV cutoff and N both go to infinity in a correlated way.
  • The conformal near-horizon description of diamond entropy is effectively derived from the N=∞ limit of AdS/CFT combined with TNRG.
  • Rotational symmetry on the transverse sphere is absent in the central-node algebra; it is recovered only at the boundary.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A direct test of the claim: build a finite-size tensor network for a large-N CFT and check whether the central-node spectrum contains only s-wave modes with the near-horizon free-field spectrum; non-s-wave modes would falsify it.
  • If the argument is correct, proposals that use bulk QFT below the AdS radius for describing black-hole interiors or cosmological diamonds would need to be replaced by a 1+1D boundary CFT description.
  • The double-scaling requirement may be insensitive to the cutoff scheme, since any cutoff obeying scale/radius duality forces the same conclusion.
  • The paper does not fully account for the large central charge; a fuller treatment might show that soft-graviton states alter the central-node spectrum even at leading order, which would not change the qualitative conclusion but would change quantitative predictions.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper challenges the Leutheusser–Liu (LL) claim that, at finite UV cutoff, the Type III_1 subalgebras of the large-N CFT operator algebra describe bulk local fields in a causal diamond. The authors propose instead that the correct finite-N/finite-cutoff object is the central node of a tensor network renormalization group (TNRG) built on a hyperbolic lattice. They argue that the central node contains only zero-angular-momentum modes, and that near the diamond horizon the radial equations for scalars, Dirac fields, vectors, and tensors reduce to 1+1-dimensional massless field equations. On this basis they conclude that the bulk field algebra emerges only in a double scaling limit in which the boundary UV cutoff goes to infinity together with N, and that 'there is never a bulk field theory description that resolves distances smaller than the AdS radius.' Section 2 supplements this with a general scale/radius argument: a finite cutoff at α∞ shifts the diamond bifurcation surface, so that the LL diamond remains in the bulk only if the cutoff is taken to infinity with N. The paper presents itself as an argument within a conjectural lattice framework, and explicitly acknowledges that the TNRG convergence and the central-charge problem are not resolved.

Significance. If the central claim were established, it would substantially revise the interpretation of LL's Type III_1 algebras: they would describe a 1+1-dimensional near-horizon conformal system rather than a bulk QFT in a diamond, and sub-AdS-radius locality would be a derived emergent property rather than an input. The paper is valuable for articulating a concrete cutoff-dependent scenario and for emphasizing that scale/radius duality forces a relation between the cutoff and N. It also correctly stresses the tension between finite-N subalgebras and the BHJFSB area law. However, the advertised conclusion is not proven. The main supporting construction is explicitly conjectural (Section 1), the paper itself identifies the large-central-charge/soft-graviton problem as the most serious issue (Section 1.4), and the general argument in Section 2 relies on an omitted 'easy calculation' for Eq. (2.2). These are load-bearing gaps, not merely presentational.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 1, TNRG construction] The identification of a bulk causal diamond with the central node of the TNRG is the foundation of the paper's main claim, but it rests on unproven assumptions. The authors state, 'we conjecture that the complete lattice Hamiltonian generated on each shell of the network converges to the K0+P0 generator of the CFT,' and the shell-to-diamond identification is inherited from earlier work. No convergence proof or error estimate is given. Consequently, the conclusion that LL's algebras do not describe bulk local fields has so far been established only for a conjectural lattice regulator, not for the CFT itself. This gap must be addressed before the 'never' in the abstract can be supported.
  2. [Section 1.4, central charge and soft gravitons] The paper admits the 'most serious issue': the construction 'is not able to account for the large value of the central charge,' because soft-graviton states are non-perturbative in 1/N, and 'the entropy of the central node comes from terms that are essentially non-perturbative in the 1/N expansion.' This directly undermines the claim that the central-node algebra is a subalgebra of the holographic CFT. If those states are not captured, then the derived 1+1D near-horizon CFT and the resulting double-scaling conclusion do not apply to the actual CFT in the large-N limit. The manuscript needs either a positive argument that the missing states do not affect the algebraic conclusion, or a clear restriction of the claim to the truncated sector.
  3. [Section 2, Eq. (2.2)] The general double-scaling argument depends on the formula e^{-α⋄} = e^{-α∞} + Δt/(4R_AdS), which the authors call 'an easy calculation' but do not show. This is load-bearing: it is the basis for Eq. (2.3) and for the claim that LL's construction only makes sense in a double scaling limit. Please provide the derivation. In addition, the inequality (2.3) as printed, e^{α∞} = r∞/R_AdS > R_AdS/t, appears dimensionally inconsistent: the left side is dimensionless while the right side has dimensions of inverse length (or time, depending on conventions). The powers and prefactors need to be stated correctly.
  4. [Sections 1.1–1.4 and Conclusions] The near-horizon reduction starts from the N=∞ free bulk field equations, which are already a bulk QFT description. Showing that the radial modes reduce to 1+1D massless equations does not, by itself, rule out a bulk local field theory at sub-AdS-radius scales under all cutoff prescriptions. The statement that 'an alternate cutoff scheme ... would, of necessity, have to probe locality ... and would claim that a QFT description ... was valid' is an assertion, not a proof. The paper should state what class of cutoffs is covered and provide a concrete argument that no other order-of-limits or regulator can reproduce LL's bulk diamond algebras at finite cutoff. The entropy/back-reaction argument around Eq. (1.30) is suggestive but applies to entropy accounting, not to all possible bulk observables.
minor comments (4)
  1. [General] The paper would benefit from defining the dimensionless ratio R_AdS/L_P and the small parameter ε in Eq. (1.1) more carefully; R is used both for the ball radius and for the AdS radius, which can confuse the reader.
  2. [Eq. (1.7) and surrounding text] The statement that 'the order one terms are negligible' needs a scale: negligible relative to what, and in which units? The same issue appears in the Dirac and vector reductions, where mass terms are dropped as order one.
  3. [Section 1.4, Eq. (1.22)] The massive spin-2 equation is written with flat metric η_{\mu\nu}; the curved-space version and the regime r ≪ R_AdS in which the flat approximation is used should be specified more explicitly.
  4. [References] Reference [14] and [18] are the same Evenbly–Vidal paper and should be merged. Reference [49] has an obvious typo in the arXiv identifier ('[astro-ph.CO;'), and the Figure 2 caption contains 'casual diamond' instead of 'causal diamond'.

Circularity Check

3 steps flagged

Central 'no sub-AdS bulk QFT' claim partially reduces to the conjectural TNRG/single-site ansatz and self-cited [13], though the Section 2 cutoff calculation is independent.

specific steps
  1. self definitional [Section 1, TNRG construction (paragraph beginning 'It is clear from these constructions...'); Section 1.1 scalar fields]
    "For the central node of a tensor network construction of the CFT it is the algebra of that node, and for finite shells of the network it is a finite tensor product of central node algebras. That algebra contains no excitations of non-zero orbital angular momentum on S^{d−2}."

    The central claim that the bulk diamond algebra is a 1+1D s-wave system is put in by hand: the 'central node' is a single lattice site whose algebra is assumed to contain only zero-angular-momentum operators ('only zero orbital angular momentum components of local operators should appear in the single node algebra'). Section 1.1 then drops the angular term for exactly that reason, so the derived near-horizon CFT is a restatement of the single-site truncation, not an independent prediction about the CFT. The radius R=R_AdS(R_AdS/L_P)^{-epsilon} is also chosen slightly below the AdS radius, so the conclusion that no sub-AdS-radius locality exists is inscribed in the regulator from the start.

  2. self citation load bearing [Section 1, bullet list (TNRG shells as causal diamond boundaries)]
    "In [13] we argued that the shells of the tensor network should be interpreted as the boundaries of causal diamonds along a geodesic running through the center of the global coordinate system defined by K0+P0 and that this converted the embedding maps of the TNRG into a discrete analog of causal time evolution (a sort of two side modular inclusion) in the proper time of that geodesic."

    The mapping 'tensor network shell = boundary of bulk causal diamond' is the load-bearing identification that turns the central-node algebra into the bulk diamond algebra. Here it is supported only by the authors' own reference [13]; no independent derivation is given. The paper's conclusion that Leutheusser-Liu algebras describe the central node rather than bulk local fields therefore rests on a self-citation chain.

  3. ansatz smuggled in via citation [Section 1.4, Tensor fields]
    "We’ve thus effectively derived the conjecture of [23–25] in the N=∞ limit of AdS/CFT models, by assuming the tensor network regularization of the CFT."

    The 'derivation' of the Carlip-Solodukhin near-horizon CFT (which includes the authors' own [25]) takes as input precisely the conjectural TNRG regularization whose validity is at issue. The paper later concedes this regularization cannot account for the large central charge and that the central-node entropy is non-perturbative in 1/N. A conjecture derived from an assumed regulator is then used as evidence for the regulator's physical conclusion, so the support is circular rather than independent.

full rationale

The paper is not wholly circular: Section 2 (Eqs. 2.2–2.3) is a genuine, self-contained argument that with a Dirichlet cutoff at α∞, the bifurcation surface sits at e^{-α⋄}=e^{-α∞}+Δt/(4R_AdS), so a finite cutoff cannot keep arbitrarily small finite-time diamonds in the bulk and some double-scaling of cutoff with N is required. That portion does not reduce to a fit or to the authors' prior work. However, the stronger abstract claim—'There is never a bulk field theory description that resolves distances smaller than the AdS radius'—and the reading of Leutheusser-Liu algebras as 1+1D near-horizon CFTs are not consequences of that calculation alone. They come from the TNRG picture in Section 1, in which the central node is defined as a single coarse-grained site of radius slightly below R_AdS and is decreed to contain only s-wave operators; the 1+1D reduction then follows by dropping angular terms. The identification of TNRG shells with causal diamond boundaries is taken from the authors' own [13], and the derivation of the Carlip-Solodukhin conjecture uses the same TNRG assumption. The paper explicitly concedes it cannot account for the large central charge and that the central-node entropy is non-perturbative in 1/N, so the central-node algebra has not been exhibited as a subalgebra of the CFT. Hence the central 'never sub-AdS' conclusion is partially circular, but the independent double-scaling argument gives the paper real content and prevents the score from being higher.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the conjectural TNRG construction and on scale/radius duality. The free parameters epsilon and Delta_* are chosen ad hoc, and the near-horizon reduction uses approximations the authors flag as not general. No independent falsifiable entity is introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • epsilon
    Ad hoc exponent in R = R_AdS (R_AdS/L_P)^(-epsilon) (Eqs. 1.1, 1.8) controlling how close the central ball is to the AdS radius; said to depend on the particular model.
  • Delta_*
    Operator dimension cutoff below which the single-site Hilbert space is matched to the CFT spectrum; chosen by hand, with no specified scaling in N.
axioms (5)
  • ad hoc to paper The TNRG embedding maps converge to the CFT Hamiltonian K0+P0 on each shell.
    Explicitly conjectural in Section 1; load-bearing for the derivation of the near-horizon CFT and for the conclusion about sub-AdS locality.
  • domain assumption Only zero orbital angular momentum components of local operators appear in the single-node algebra.
    Imposed by the lattice cutoff; used to drop angular terms in the Dirac, vector, and tensor equations (Sections 1.2–1.4).
  • domain assumption Order-one terms in the light-front wave equation can be neglected near the diamond boundary.
    The authors acknowledge the required ∂_+ >> ∂_- implication is not true in general; the reduction to a massless 1+1D field relies on this approximation.
  • domain assumption A boundary UV cutoff is equivalent to a bulk volume cutoff on global spatial slices of AdS.
    Assumed from Susskind–Witten [43] and used in Section 2: 'if we accept scale/radius duality'.
  • standard math In the N=∞ limit, bulk fields satisfy free field equations.
    Standard large-N factorization in AdS/CFT; invoked explicitly in Section 1.1.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 12509 in / 12330 out tokens · 125924 ms · 2026-08-03T10:32:29.569326+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Quantum Field Theory introduced us to the notion that a causal diamond in space-time corresponded to a subsystem of a quantum mechanical system defined on the global space-time. Work by Jacobson, Fischler and Susskind, and particularly Bousso suggested that, in the quantum theory of gravity, this subsystem should have a density matrix of finite entropy. These authors formalized older intuitive arguments based on black hole physics. Although mathematically, Type II von Neumann algebras admit finite entropy density matrices, the black hole arguments suggest that the number of physical states in these subsystems is finite. The conjecture that de Sitter (dS) space has a finite number of physical states was first made by Fischler and one of the present authors. Leutheusser and Liu showed that, in the $N = \infty$ limit, causal diamonds with finite area in AdS radius units had Type $III_1$ von Neumann sub-algebras of the full operator algebra. They claimed that this was true for finite values of the UV cutoff, and that the algebra was the algebra of bulk local fields in the diamond. We will argue that the second part of this conjecture is incorrect and that the bulk field algebra emerges only in a double scaled limit, where the boundary UV cutoff is taken to infinity as $N$ is taken to infinity. There is never a bulk field theory description that resolves distances smaller than the AdS radius.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references · 50 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Thermodynamics of space-time: The Einstein equation of state,

    T. Jacobson,“Thermodynamics of space-time: The Einstein equation of state,” Phys. Rev. Lett.75, 1260-1263 (1995) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.75.1260 [arXiv:gr-qc/9504004 [gr-qc]]. – 12 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  2. [2]

    Holography and cosmology,

    W. Fischler and L. Susskind,“Holography and cosmology,” [arXiv:hep-th/9806039 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  3. [3]

    A Covariant entropy conjecture,

    R. Bousso,“A Covariant entropy conjecture,” JHEP07, 004 (1999) doi:10.1088/1126-6708/1999/07/004 [arXiv:hep-th/9905177 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  4. [4]

    Holography in general space-times,

    R. Bousso,“Holography in general space-times,” JHEP06, 028 (1999) doi:10.1088/1126-6708/1999/06/028 [arXiv:hep-th/9906022 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  5. [5]

    The Holographic principle for general backgrounds,

    R. Bousso,“The Holographic principle for general backgrounds,” Class. Quant. Grav.17, 997-1005 (2000) doi:10.1088/0264-9381/17/5/309 [arXiv:hep-th/9911002 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  6. [6]

    Cosmological breaking of supersymmetry?,

    T. Banks, Talk at the Festschrift for L. Susskind, Stanford University, June 2000; T. Banks, “Cosmological breaking of supersymmetry?,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A16, 910-921 (2001) doi:10.1142/S0217751X01003998 [arXiv:hep-th/0007146 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  7. [7]

    Fischler, ”Taking de Sitter Seriously”, Talk at the Festschrift for G

    W. Fischler, ”Taking de Sitter Seriously”, Talk at the Festschrift for G. West, Taos, New Mexico, 2000

    2000

  8. [8]

    Subregion-subalgebra duality: Emergence of space and time in holography,

    S. Leutheusser and H. Liu, “Subregion-subalgebra duality: Emergence of space and time in holography,” Phys. Rev. D111, no.6, 066021 (2025) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.111.066021 [arXiv:2212.13266 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    Local bulk operators in AdS/CFT: A Boundary view of horizons and locality,

    A. Hamilton, D. N. Kabat, G. Lifschytz and D. A. Lowe, “Local bulk operators in AdS/CFT: A Boundary view of horizons and locality,” Phys. Rev. D73, 086003 (2006) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.73.086003 [arXiv:hep-th/0506118 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  10. [10]

    Hamilton, D

    A. Hamilton, D. N. Kabat, G. Lifschytz and D. A. Lowe, Phys. Rev. D74, 066009 (2006) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.74.066009 [arXiv:hep-th/0606141 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  11. [11]

    Bulk Locality and Quantum Error Correction in AdS/CFT,

    A. Almheiri, X. Dong and D. Harlow, “Bulk Locality and Quantum Error Correction in AdS/CFT,” JHEP04, 163 (2015) doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2015)163 [arXiv:1411.7041 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  12. [13]

    Holographic Space-time Models of Anti-deSitter Space-times,

    T. Banks and W. Fischler,“Holographic Space-time Models of Anti-deSitter Space-times,” [arXiv:1607.03510 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  13. [14]

    Tensor Network Renormalization,

    G. Evenbly and G. Vidal, “Tensor Network Renormalization,” Phys. Rev. Lett.115, no.18, 180405 (2015) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.180405

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.115.180405 2015

  14. [15]

    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]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  15. [16]

    S matrices from AdS space-time,

    J. Polchinski,“S matrices from AdS space-time,” [arXiv:hep-th/9901076 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  16. [17]

    Holography in the flat space limit,

    L. Susskind, “Holography in the flat space limit,” AIP Conf. Proc.493, no.1, 98-112 (1999) doi:10.1063/1.1301570 [arXiv:hep-th/9901079 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  17. [18]

    Tensor Network Renormalization,

    G. Evenbly and G. Vidal,“Tensor Network Renormalization,” Phys. Rev. Lett.115, no.18, 180405 (2015) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.180405 [arXiv:1412.0732 [cond-mat.str-el]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  18. [19]

    Local Scale Transformations on the Lattice with Tensor Network Renormalization,

    G. Evenbly and G. Vidal, “Local Scale Transformations on the Lattice with Tensor Network Renormalization,” Phys. Rev. Lett.116, no.4, 040401 (2016) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.040401 [arXiv:1510.00689 [cond-mat.str-el]]. – 13 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  19. [20]

    Holographic quantum error-correcting codes: Toy models for the bulk/boundary correspondence,

    F. Pastawski, B. Yoshida, D. Harlow and J. Preskill, “Holographic quantum error-correcting codes: Toy models for the bulk/boundary correspondence,” JHEP06, 149 (2015) doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2015)149 [arXiv:1503.06237 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  20. [21]

    Entanglement Renormalization and Holography,

    B. Swingle, “Entanglement Renormalization and Holography,” Phys. Rev. D86, 065007 (2012) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86.065007 [arXiv:0905.1317 [cond-mat.str-el]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  21. [22]

    Constructing holographic spacetimes using entanglement renormalization,

    B. Swingle, “Constructing holographic spacetimes using entanglement renormalization,” [arXiv:1209.3304 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  22. [23]

    Black hole entropy from conformal field theory in any dimension,

    S. Carlip, “Black hole entropy from conformal field theory in any dimension,” Phys. Rev. Lett.82, 2828-2831 (1999) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.82.2828 [arXiv:hep-th/9812013 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  23. [24]

    Conformal description of horizon’s states,

    S. N. Solodukhin, “Conformal description of horizon’s states,” Phys. Lett. B454, 213-222 (1999) doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(99)00398-6 [arXiv:hep-th/9812056 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  24. [25]

    Conformal description of near-horizon vacuum states,

    T. Banks and K. M. Zurek, “Conformal description of near-horizon vacuum states,” Phys. Rev. D104, no.12, 126026 (2021) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.126026 [arXiv:2108.04806 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  25. [26]

    Spacetime Fluctuations in AdS/CFT,

    E. Verlinde and K. M. Zurek, “Spacetime Fluctuations in AdS/CFT,” JHEP04, 209 (2020) doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2020)209 [arXiv:1911.02018 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  26. [27]

    Aspects of capacity of entanglement,

    J. De Boer, J. J¨ arvel¨ a and E. Keski-Vakkuri, “Aspects of capacity of entanglement,” Phys. Rev. D99, no.6, 066012 (2019) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.99.066012 [arXiv:1807.07357 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  27. [28]

    A universal feature of CFT R´ enyi entropy,

    E. Perlmutter, “A universal feature of CFT R´ enyi entropy,” JHEP03, 117 (2014) doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2014)117 [arXiv:1308.1083 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  28. [29]

    Effective field theory, black holes, and the cosmological constant,

    A. G. Cohen, D. B. Kaplan and A. E. Nelson, “Effective field theory, black holes, and the cosmological constant,” Phys. Rev. Lett.82, 4971-4974 (1999) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.82.4971 [arXiv:hep-th/9803132 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  29. [30]

    Remarks on the Cohen-Kaplan-Nelson bound,

    T. Banks and P. Draper, “Remarks on the Cohen-Kaplan-Nelson bound,” Phys. Rev. D101, no.12, 126010 (2020) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.126010 [arXiv:1911.05778 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  30. [31]

    Densities of states and the Cohen-Kaplan-Nelson bound,

    N. Blinov and P. Draper, “Densities of states and the Cohen-Kaplan-Nelson bound,” Phys. Rev. D104, no.7, 076024 (2021) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.076024 [arXiv:2107.03530 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  31. [32]

    Black holes and entropy,

    J. D. Bekenstein, “Black holes and entropy,” Phys. Rev. D7(1973), 2333-2346 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.7.2333

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.7.2333 1973

  32. [33]

    Particle Creation by Black Holes,

    S. W. Hawking, “Particle Creation by Black Holes,” Commun. Math. Phys.43(1975), 199-220 [erratum: Commun. Math. Phys.46(1976), 206] doi:10.1007/BF02345020

    doi:10.1007/bf02345020 1975

  33. [34]

    On the Quantum Structure of a Black Hole,

    G. ’t Hooft, “On the Quantum Structure of a Black Hole,” Nucl. Phys. B256, 727-745 (1985) doi:10.1016/0550-3213(85)90418-3

    doi:10.1016/0550-3213(85)90418-3 1985

  34. [35]

    Divergences problem in black hole brick wall model,

    F. Belgiorno and S. Liberati, “Divergences problem in black hole brick wall model,” Phys. Rev. D53, 3172-3177 (1996) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.53.3172 [arXiv:gr-qc/9503022 [gr-qc]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  35. [36]

    Hawking radiation entropy and horizon divergences,

    F. Belgiorno and M. Martellini, “Hawking radiation entropy and horizon divergences,” Phys. Rev. D53, 7073-7081 (1996) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.53.7073 [arXiv:gr-qc/9512044 [gr-qc]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  36. [37]

    Problems in black hole entropy interpretation,

    S. Liberati, “Problems in black hole entropy interpretation,” Nuovo Cim. B112, 405-421 (1997) [arXiv:gr-qc/9601032 [gr-qc]]. – 14 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  37. [38]

    Black holes, brick walls and the Boulware state,

    S. Mukohyama and W. Israel, “Black holes, brick walls and the Boulware state,” Phys. Rev. D58, 104005 (1998) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.58.104005 [arXiv:gr-qc/9806012 [gr-qc]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  38. [39]

    Jerusalem Lectures on Black Holes and Quantum Information,

    See, D. Harlow, “Jerusalem Lectures on Black Holes and Quantum Information,” for an extensive list of references to the voluminous literature on this controversial subject, Rev. Mod. Phys.88, 015002 (2016) doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.88.015002 [arXiv:1409.1231 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  39. [40]

    Hilbert Bundles and Holographic Space–Time Models,

    T. Banks, “Hilbert Bundles and Holographic Space–Time Models,” Astronomy4, no.2, 7 (2025) doi:10.3390/astronomy4020007 [arXiv:2306.07038 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  40. [41]

    Hilbert Bundles and Holographic Space-time: the Hydrodynamic Approach to Gravity,

    T. Banks, “Hilbert Bundles and Holographic Space-time: the Hydrodynamic Approach to Gravity,” [arXiv:2502.04924 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  41. [42]

    Banks,Effective Theory on the Boundary of Causal Diamonds, in preparation

    T. Banks,Effective Theory on the Boundary of Causal Diamonds, in preparation

  42. [43]

    The Holographic bound in anti-de Sitter space,

    L. Susskind and E. Witten, “The Holographic bound in anti-de Sitter space,” [arXiv:hep-th/9805114 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  43. [44]

    Soft Gravitons and the Flat Space Limit of Anti-deSitter Space,

    T. Banks and W. Fischler, “Soft Gravitons and the Flat Space Limit of Anti-deSitter Space,” [arXiv:1611.05906 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  44. [45]

    T Tand EE, with implications for (A)dS subregion encodings,

    A. Lewkowycz, J. Liu, E. Silverstein and G. Torroba, “T Tand EE, with implications for (A)dS subregion encodings,” JHEP04, 152 (2020) doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2020)152 [arXiv:1909.13808 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2020

  45. [46]

    De Sitter microstates fromT T+ Λ 2 and the Hawking-Page transition,

    E. Coleman, E. A. Mazenc, V. Shyam, E. Silverstein, R. M. Soni, G. Torroba and S. Yang, “De Sitter microstates fromT T+ Λ 2 and the Hawking-Page transition,” JHEP07, 140 (2022) doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2022)140 [arXiv:2110.14670 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  46. [47]

    Black hole to cosmic horizon microstates in string/M theory: timelike boundaries and internal averaging,

    E. Silverstein, “Black hole to cosmic horizon microstates in string/M theory: timelike boundaries and internal averaging,” JHEP05, 160 (2023) doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2023)160 [arXiv:2212.00588 [hep-th]],

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  47. [48]

    Timelike-bounded dS 4 holography from a solvable sector of the T2 deformation,

    E. Silverstein and G. Torroba, “Timelike-bounded dS 4 holography from a solvable sector of the T2 deformation,” JHEP03, 156 (2025) doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2025)156 [arXiv:2409.08709 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  48. [49]

    Quantum stress-energy at timelike boundaries: testing a new beyond-ΛCDM parameter with cosmological data,

    O. H. E. Philcox, E. Silverstein and G. Torroba,“Quantum stress-energy at timelike boundaries: testing a new beyond-ΛCDM parameter with cosmological data,” [arXiv:2507.00115 [astro-ph.CO

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  49. [50]

    Flat space gravity at finite cutoff,

    B. Banihashemi, E. Shaghoulian and S. Shashi, “Flat space gravity at finite cutoff,” Class. Quant. Grav.42, no.3, 035010 (2025) doi:10.1088/1361-6382/ada2d7 [arXiv:2409.07643 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  50. [51]

    Timelike Liouville theory and AdS 3 gravity at finite cutoff,

    K. Allameh and E. Shaghoulian, “Timelike Liouville theory and AdS 3 gravity at finite cutoff,” [arXiv:2508.03236 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  51. [52]

    Holographic Theory of Accelerated Observers, the S-matrix, and the Emergence of Effective Field Theory,

    T. Banks and W. Fischler,“Holographic Theory of Accelerated Observers, the S-matrix, and the Emergence of Effective Field Theory,” [arXiv:1301.5924 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  52. [53]

    Holographic Space-time, Newton’s Law and the Dynamics of Black Holes,

    T. Banks and W. Fischler, “Holographic Space-time, Newton’s Law and the Dynamics of Black Holes,” [arXiv:1606.01267 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  53. [54]

    Holographic space-time, Newton’s law, and the dynamics of horizons,

    T. Banks and W. Fischler, “Holographic space-time, Newton’s law, and the dynamics of horizons,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 27, no.1, 65-86 (2023) doi:10.4310/ATMP.2023.v27.n1.a3 [arXiv:2003.03637 [hep-th]]. – 15 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  54. [55]

    Holographic Space-time Models in 1 + 1 Dimensions,

    T. Banks,“Holographic Space-time Models in 1 + 1 Dimensions,” [arXiv:1506.05777 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  55. [56]

    Microscopic Models of Linear Dilaton Gravity and Their Semi-classical Approximations,

    T. Banks, “Microscopic Models of Linear Dilaton Gravity and Their Semi-classical Approximations,” [arXiv:2005.09479 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  56. [57]

    JT gravity coupled to fermions,

    Banks, P. Draper and B. Zhang, “JT gravity coupled to fermions,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 27, no.2, 483-522 (2023) doi:10.4310/ATMP.2023.v27.n2.a2 [arXiv:2205.07382 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  57. [58]

    Note on TypeIII 1 Algebras inc= 1 String Theory and Bulk Causal Diamonds,

    T. Banks, “Note on TypeIII 1 Algebras inc= 1 String Theory and Bulk Causal Diamonds,” [arXiv:2504.15076 [hep-th]]. – 16 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv