Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 5 cited by

Demanding factorization through the second excited level forces the Koba-Nielsen intercept to the bosonic string value α0=−1, and a subleading multipositivity bound forbids the simplest four-point string deformation.

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

2026-08-02 18:49 UTC pith:BB3SWLT6

load-bearing objection Level-two factorization pins α0 = −1 for minimal degeneracy and the subleading multipositivity bound kills the symmetric part of the f̃4 satellite, but the unique-family classification in Sec. IIB still rests on an unproven N>7 conjecture. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2603.04485 v2 pith:BB3SWLT6 submitted 2026-03-04 hep-th hep-ph

Higher-Spin and Higher-Point Constraints on Stringy Amplitudes

Ivano Basile , Grant N. Remmen , Georgina Staudt This is my paper
classification hep-th hep-ph
keywords string amplitudesKoba-NielsenfactorizationRegge interceptmultipositivity boundshigher-spin statessatellite deformationssoft kinematics
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.

The paper tries to show that simple self-consistency conditions—factorization into three-point vertices with real couplings, plus a mild spectral assumption—uniquely select the ordinary bosonic string among Koba-Nielsen-type amplitudes. Carrying factorization through mass level n=2 and up to seven external particles, the authors find that the Regge intercept must be α0=−1, exactly the bosonic string value, and that the low-lying three-point couplings are uniquely fixed. The same machinery constrains arbitrary deformations of the worldsheet integrand, leaving a single family of residues consistent with minimal degeneracy, with spacetime dimension constrained by the intercept. For massless superstring scattering, where degeneracy is unavoidable, the paper derives large-level positivity bounds in a soft limit and uses them to show that the simplest factorizable satellite deformation cannot shift the four-point amplitude at all.

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that multiparticle factorization, together with minimal degeneracy (at most one intermediate state of each spin at each mass level through n=2), completely fixes the Regge intercept of Koba-Nielsen amplitudes to α0=−1. This is proven by matching the four- and five-point residues to the three-point ansatz and then evaluating the six-point mismatch, whose kinematic derivative is exactly α0(1+α0)/(2(2+α0)); factorization forces this to vanish, ruling out all intercepts except 0 and −1, and α0=0 is then excluded by a nonvanishing kinematic expression in any dimension. For massless external states with arbitrary degeneracy, the paper computes the leading and first

What carries the argument

The central object is the half-ladder family of factorization residues, expressed in positive y-variables so that residues are read off by taking y→0 limits. The load-bearing identity is the six-point mismatch formula ∂X2,4∂X2,6(Rλ222−RKN222)=α0(1+α0)/(2(2+α0)), which vanishes only for α0=0 or −1. For the massless analysis, the key mechanism is a saddle-point evaluation of the soft N-point residue at large mass level n, yielding the universal leading form RN,n∼RKN N,n P4* and a first-subleading correction involving P_N and its derivatives; the subleading correction feeds into the 2×2 principal minors of the multipositivity Hankel matrix, producing the inequality (1+z)(2P_N+1(2)−P_N(2)−P_N+2(

Load-bearing premise

The conclusion that the intercept must be −1 rests on assuming minimal degeneracy—at most one intermediate state of each spin at each mass level through n=2—which the superstring itself does not satisfy at level two.

What would settle it

Find a real solution of the minimal-degeneracy factorization equations at six and seven points with α0=0. If such a solution exists, the reported nonzero kinematic expression in the six-point mismatch (Eq. 9) would be evaded, and the claim that α0=−1 is uniquely forced would be false.

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

If this is right

  • Any Koba-Nielsen amplitude with minimal degeneracy through level two and unitarity-consistent factorization is forced to have intercept α0=−1, the bosonic string value; the superstring and Z-theory, with α0=0, must therefore have degenerate spectra at n=2.
  • The unique real assignment of three-point couplings through level two shows that the low-lying bosonic string couplings are determined by S-matrix consistency, not just by the worldsheet construction.
  • The subleading multipositivity bound implies the symmetric part of the simplest four-point satellite deformation vanishes identically, so unitarity alone removes that deformation from the space of allowed string amplitudes.
  • The large-level saddle-point method converts consistency constraints on the infinite tower of higher-spin states into ordinary inequalities on the deformation function and its derivatives, making the entire tower active in bounding any deformation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Inference — The same level-by-level factorization logic, if pushed to higher n, likely rules out any minimal-degeneracy Koba-Nielsen deformation with intercept different from −1, so the α0=−1 result may extend to arbitrary mass level rather than stopping at level two.
  • Inference — If the unique residue family found through N=7 extends to all multiplicities, it would constitute a new unitarity-consistent minimal-degeneracy deformation of the bosonic string; if it fails at N=8, that failure would be an even sharper rigidity statement than the paper's.
  • Inference — The subleading bound should also constrain the odd part of the four-point deformation once higher-N data are included, potentially forbidding all four-point deformations entirely rather than only the symmetric part.
  • Inference — The same soft-limit multipositivity technology could be adapted to closed-string (Virasoro-Shapiro) amplitudes, where the u-variables are more complicated but the saddle-point structure is likely similar.

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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the rigidity of tree-level open-string amplitudes. In the first part, assuming minimal degeneracy of same-spin states up to mass level n=2, it uses four-, five-, and six-point factorization of Koba-Nielsen residues to argue that the Regge intercept must be α0=−1 (Eqs. (8)-(9)), matching the bosonic string. It then attempts to classify general worldsheet deformations PN(u) under factorization up to multiplicity N=7, finding the bosonic string and a single family of solutions constrained by Eq. (11). In the second part, for massless external states and arbitrary spectral degeneracy, it derives large-n saddle-point expressions and a subleading multipositivity bound (Eq. (29)), which is applied to the Gross f4 satellite deformation to conclude that its even part f+ must vanish, so that no such four-point deformation is allowed.

Significance. If the computations are correct, the paper provides a concrete factorization-based derivation of α0=−1 under a stated spectral assumption, and a new positivity argument that rules out a classic satellite deformation. The paper is unusually transparent about its limitations: it explicitly notes that the minimal-degeneracy assumption excludes actual superstring spectra at level n=2, and it flags the conjectural part of its deformation classification. These are honest scope statements, not hidden assumptions. The main results are conditional on residue algebra that is largely relegated to supplemental files, and on one explicit conjecture for N>7 factorization. The paper therefore contains publishable ideas, but the full strength of the advertised rigidity is not yet established in the manuscript as written.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. IIB, footnote 4] The 'single family' conclusion is load-bearing for the paper's rigidity narrative, but the footnote concedes that at N=7 the residues still depend on the coupling λ_{2,2}^{0,1;0} and that fixing it requires an unproven conjecture about N>7 factorization. Without a proof, the deformation space is not yet a single family but a one-parameter family. Please either prove the conjecture (even for one higher multiplicity) or revise the abstract and Sec. IIB to state that the classification holds only modulo this conjecture.
  2. [Secs. IIA-IIB, Eqs. (8)-(9)] The central results—the mismatch in Eq. (8), the exclusion of α0=0 in Eq. (9), the λ-coupling tables, and the seven-point PN(u) classification—are delegated to supplemental files. As the manuscript text contains only the final results, the reader cannot verify the main computations. Please include the residue algebra in an appendix (or at least a substantial sample of the higher-point residues) so that the factorization matching can be checked, or provide the supplemental file with the full derivations and make its location explicit.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Sec. IIA] The abstract states that α0 is fixed 'using seven-point factorization', but the explicit derivation in Sec. IIA uses four-, five-, and six-point residues, with Eq. (8) being a six-point condition. Please reconcile the wording.
  2. [Sec. IIIC, Eq. (32)] The definition f+(x)=log(√2 + w(x)/2)/(x(1−x)) appears inconsistent with the stated P4(x,1−x)=(2+w(x))^2/16 and the normalization w(0)=w(1)=2. The natural definition giving that P4 is f+(x)=log((2+w(x))/4)/(x(1−x)). Please check and correct.
  3. [Sec. IIIC, Eq. (33)] The reduction of the multipositivity bound (29) to the differential inequality ww''+(w')^2≤0 is stated without intermediate steps. Since this is the key step in excluding the f4 deformation, please include the algebra or an appendix derivation.
  4. [Sec. IIB, Eq. (11)] The sentence 'the requirement of integer dimension means that Eq. (11) reduces this deformation to a discrete family' would be clearer if the allowed range of D (or α0) were spelled out, given the unitarity window −1≤α0<2/3.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: the intercept is solved from factorization and the satellite exclusion is a new subleading positivity argument; the unproven N>7 step is a gap, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

Walking the derivation chain, I find no step where the output is defined from, or fitted to, the same quantity it is used to predict. The α0=−1 result begins with a free intercept in Eq. (2), a general λ ansatz, matching of four- and five-point residues, and then the requirement that the six-point mismatch vanish: lim ∂X2,4∂X2,6(Rλ222−RKN222)=α0(1+α0)/(2(2+α0)) (Eq. (8)). This is a constraint-solve, not a fit; α0=0 is then excluded by the explicit expression in Eq. (9) and α0=−2 by an imaginary coupling. The minimal-degeneracy assumption is an external restriction and the paper explicitly notes it is not satisfied by the superstring at level 2, so it restricts the theorem rather than importing the bosonic intercept. The massless section relies on the multipositivity framework of Ref. [29], by an overlapping author. That is self-citation, but it is independent support: Ref. [29] derives the Hankel positivity condition from reality of three-point couplings/unitarity for arbitrary degeneracy, and the new subleading computation here (Eq. (29)) plus the saturation argument on w(x)w″(x)+(w′(x))²≤0 does the work of excluding f~+. This is not a restatement of the input. The only real weakness is non-circular: in Sec. IIB the footnote concedes that at seven points the residues depend on λ0,1;0_{2,2}, but the authors conjecture that imposing factorization on the N>7 amplitudes will fix this coupling as well. The single-family classification is therefore not fully closed unless that conjecture is proven, but the α0=−1 result does not depend on it. No fitted-data, definitional, or uniqueness-by-self-citation reduction is present.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

No new particles, forces, or mediators are introduced; the 'higher-spin tower' and 'satellite deformations' are existing structures. The main external inputs are the minimal-degeneracy restriction, the factorization-equivalence assumption, and the multipositivity framework from prior work.

free parameters (2)
  • Regge intercept α0 = −1 (derived from factorization)
    Introduced as an arbitrary parameter in the Koba-Nielsen amplitude (Eq. (2)); the central result is that minimal-degeneracy factorization forces α0=−1, so it is a constrained parameter rather than a fitted one.
  • λ^{0,1;0}_{2,2} (seven-point deformation-family coupling) = unfixed; conjectured to be fixed by N>7 factorization
    In Sec. IIB footnote 4, the authors state that seven-point residues of the 'unique family' depend on this coupling and conjecture that higher-multiplicity factorization fixes it. Until then the family has one free parameter.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Minimal degeneracy through level n=2
    At most one state at each spin ≤ n at mass levels n≤2; defines the theory space for the α0=−1 result. The superstring and Z-theory have degeneracy at n=2, so the conclusion does not apply to them.
  • domain assumption Factorization into three-point amplitudes with real λ couplings is equivalent to tree-level unitarity
    The central matching criterion (Sec. II) is borrowed from Ref. [28]: residues must be reproducible from real three-point couplings. No independent proof is given in this paper.
  • domain assumption Multipositivity Hankel conditions (Eq. (13)) are valid unitarity constraints
    Used in Sec. III as the basis for the large-level bounds; established in Ref. [29] by overlapping authors and assumed here.
  • domain assumption The deformation factor satisfies massless factorization PN(u*)=P4*
    Required for the saddle-point residue formula (Eqs. (23)-(24)); the paper states this holds for the satellite theories of Refs. [12,28].
  • standard math Validity of saddle-point/steepest descent for arbitrary PN(u)
    Used to derive Eqs. (23)-(29) for n≫1 with z=t/n fixed; no explicit error bounds or analyticity conditions for general PN are given.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 15442 in / 18312 out tokens · 174116 ms · 2026-08-02T18:49:26.500257+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We employ multiparticle factorization to constrain deformations of tree-level open string amplitudes. Assuming minimal degeneracy among intermediate states of the same spin up through the second excited level, we find that the Regge intercept among all amplitudes of the Koba-Nielsen type can be uniquely fixed using seven-point factorization, precisely matching the bosonic string. Moreover, we produce novel constraints on deformations of the worldsheet integrand. We then turn to deformations of superstrings, with massless external states and arbitrary spectral degeneracy, using soft kinematics. Accounting for the infinite tower of higher-spin resonances, we obtain novel multipositivity bounds to leading and subleading order in the large-level limit. We apply these bounds to the simplest factorizable satellite deformation in the family of amplitudes found by Gross, showing that any deformation of four-point string amplitudes of this type is forbidden by unitarity. Our results reinforce the folklore that the higher-spin tower of string excitations is dramatically more rigid than any finite number of species.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.04485 by Georgina Staudt, Grant N. Remmen, Ivano Basile.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Conventions for the half-ladder topology of the fac [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

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

  1. Gravitational Effective Theories with Maximal Supersymmetry and a Peculiar Parity

    hep-th 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0

    Peculiar parity plus N=8 SUSY, tree-level factorization, and finitely many states at the mass gap uniquely select the Virasoro–Shapiro amplitude among weakly-coupled UV completions of N=8 supergravity.

  2. Thermal Positivity

    hep-th 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Lorentz invariance and unitarity imply strictly positive low-temperature interaction corrections of the form T^{2D-4+4k} (k>0) to the pressure in perturbative massless boson theories.

  3. Consistent Scattering Amplitudes, Yang-Mills, the Higgs Mechanism and the EFTs Beyond

    hep-th 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    S-matrix consistency forces the complete gluon amplitude structure and requires Yang-Mills Lie algebra plus Higgs mechanism for unitarised massive vector boson scattering.

  4. Multipositivity Constrains the Chiral Lagrangian

    hep-th 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Multipositivity bounds derived from planar tree-level scattering amplitudes constrain Wilson coefficients of the chiral Lagrangian from below by the chiral anomaly.

  5. The Equivalence Principle at High Energies Completes the Spectrum

    hep-th 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Tree-level gravitational scattering under the equivalence principle mandates single-particle states in all irreducible representations constructible from a single seed charge, with equal interaction strengths.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 45 linked inside Pith · cited by 5 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Construction of a crossing-symmetric, Regge-behaved amplitude for linearly rising trajecto- ries,

    G. Veneziano, “Construction of a crossing-symmetric, Regge-behaved amplitude for linearly rising trajecto- ries,”Nuovo Cim. A57(1968) 190

    1968

  2. [2]

    (15) in the large-nlimit using the Stirling approxi- mation, we find RN,n(nz)∼R KN N,n(nz)P∗ 4 (24) as anticipated

    (23) Reinstating the saddle-point exponential prefactor exp (nS(u∗,z)) = (1 +z) n(1+z)z−nz and comparing with Eq. (15) in the large-nlimit using the Stirling approxi- mation, we find RN,n(nz)∼R KN N,n(nz)P∗ 4 (24) as anticipated. The upshot of this calculation is the positivity bound P4≥0. The matrix of soft residues has equal entries to leading order in ...

  3. [3]

    Assuming thatP 4 never vanishes yields Eq. (29). 8 More complicated deformations involve additional func- tions ˜fN(x)forN >4, and the corresponding structure of Eq. (30) guarantees factorization to arbitraryN-point (albeit possibly with imaginary couplings). We now apply the bounds derived in Sec. IIIB to this theory. Remarkably, we will be able to show ...

  4. [4]

    Hence, forn≫1, RN,n(nz)∼ √ 1 +z 2πnz enS(u∗,z)P∗

  5. [5]

    Stringy dynamics from an amplitudes bootstrap,

    C. Cheung and G. N. Remmen, “Stringy dynamics from an amplitudes bootstrap,”Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 026011,arXiv:2302.12263 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    Bespoke dual resonance,

    C. Cheung and G. N. Remmen, “Bespoke dual resonance,”Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 086009, arXiv:2308.03833 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    Unitarity of bespoke amplitudes,

    R. Bhardwaj, M. Spradlin, A. Volovich, and H.-C. Weng, “Unitarity of bespoke amplitudes,”Phys. Rev. D110no. 10, (2024) 106016,arXiv:2406.04410 [hep- th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    Veneziano variations: how unique are string amplitudes?,

    C. Cheung and G. N. Remmen, “Veneziano variations: how unique are string amplitudes?,”JHEP01(2023) 122,arXiv:2210.12163 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  9. [9]

    Accumulation-point amplitudes in string theory,

    J. Maldacena and G. N. Remmen, “Accumulation-point amplitudes in string theory,”JHEP08(2022) 152, arXiv:2207.06426 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  10. [10]

    Generalized Veneziano and Virasoro amplitudes,

    N. Geiser and L. W. Lindwasser, “Generalized Veneziano and Virasoro amplitudes,”JHEP04(2023) 031,arXiv:2210.14920 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  11. [11]

    The stringy S-matrix bootstrap: maximal spin and superpolynomial soft- ness,

    K. Häring and A. Zhiboedov, “The stringy S-matrix bootstrap: maximal spin and superpolynomial soft- ness,”JHEP10(2024) 075,arXiv:2311.13631 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  12. [12]

    UV-complete gravity amplitudes and the triple product,

    Y.-t. Huang and G. N. Remmen, “UV-complete gravity amplitudes and the triple product,”Phys. Rev. D106 (2022) L021902,arXiv:2203.00696 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  13. [13]

    Boot- strap Principle for the Spectrum and Scattering of Strings,

    C. Cheung, A. Hillman, and G. N. Remmen, “Boot- strap Principle for the Spectrum and Scattering of Strings,”Phys. Rev. Lett.133no. 25, (2024) 251601, arXiv:2406.02665 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  14. [14]

    Unique- ness criteria for the Virasoro-Shapiro amplitude,

    C. Cheung, A. Hillman, and G. N. Remmen, “Unique- ness criteria for the Virasoro-Shapiro amplitude,”Phys. Rev. D111no.8, (2025)086034,arXiv:2408.03362 [hep- th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  15. [15]

    Factorization and the generalized Veneziano model with satellites,

    D. J. Gross, “Factorization and the generalized Veneziano model with satellites,”Nucl. Phys. B13 (1969) 467

    1969

  16. [16]

    Strings from Almost Nothing,

    C. Cheung, G. N. Remmen, F. Sciotti, and M. Tarquini, “Strings from Almost Nothing,”arXiv:2508.09246 [hep- th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  17. [17]

    Whereistree-level string theory?,

    J.Albert, W.Knop, andL.Rastelli, “Whereistree-level string theory?,”JHEP02(2025) 157,arXiv:2406.12959 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  18. [18]

    Where Is String Theory in the Space of Scattering Amplitudes?,

    A. Guerrieri, J. Penedones, and P. Vieira, “Where Is String Theory in the Space of Scattering Amplitudes?,” Phys. Rev. Lett.127(2021) 081601,arXiv:2102.02847 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  19. [19]

    Where is M-theory in the space of scattering ampli- tudes?,

    A. Guerrieri, H. Murali, J. Penedones, and P. Vieira, “Where is M-theory in the space of scattering ampli- tudes?,”JHEP06(2023) 064,arXiv:2212.00151 [hep- th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  20. [20]

    Shedding black hole light on the emergent string conjecture,

    I. Basile, D. Lüst, and C. Montella, “Shedding black hole light on the emergent string conjecture,”JHEP07 (2024) 208,arXiv:2311.12113 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  21. [21]

    Density of states, black holes and the Emergent String Conjec- ture,

    A. Bedroya, R. K. Mishra, and M. Wiesner, “Density of states, black holes and the Emergent String Conjec- ture,”JHEP01(2025) 144,arXiv:2405.00083 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  22. [22]

    On the Origin of Species Thermodynamics and the Black Hole - Tower Correspondence,

    A. Herráez, D. Lüst, J. Masias, and M. Scalisi, “On the Origin of Species Thermodynamics and the Black Hole - Tower Correspondence,”SciPost Phys.18(2025) ,arXiv:2406.17851 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  23. [23]

    An excursion into the string spectrum,

    C. Markou and E. Skvortsov, “An excursion into the string spectrum,”JHEP12(2023) 055, arXiv:2309.15988 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  24. [24]

    On the deep superstring spectrum,

    T. Basile and C. Markou, “On the deep superstring spectrum,”JHEP07(2024) 184,arXiv:2405.18467 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  25. [25]

    On the deep string spectrum,

    C. Markou, “On the deep string spectrum,”PoS CORFU2024(2025) 170,arXiv:2505.00177 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  26. [26]

    Uniqueness of the Veneziano representa- tion,

    D. D. Coon, “Uniqueness of the Veneziano representa- tion,”Phys. Lett. B29(1969) 669

    1969

  27. [27]

    Cutting the Coon amplitude,

    C. B. Jepsen, “Cutting the Coon amplitude,”JHEP06 (2023) 114,arXiv:2303.02149 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  28. [28]

    Dualresonantamplitudesfrom Drinfel’d twists,

    R.BhardwajandS.De, “Dualresonantamplitudesfrom Drinfel’d twists,”arXiv:2309.07214 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  29. [29]

    The Baker-Coon-RomansN-point ampli- tude and an exact field theory limit of the Coon ampli- tude,

    N. Geiser, “The Baker-Coon-RomansN-point ampli- tude and an exact field theory limit of the Coon ampli- tude,”JHEP10(2024) 010,arXiv:2311.04130 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  30. [30]

    On unitarity of the Coon amplitude,

    R. Bhardwaj, S. De, M. Spradlin, and A. Volovich, “On unitarity of the Coon amplitude,”JHEP08(2023) 082, arXiv:2212.00764 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  31. [31]

    Multiparticle Factorization and the Rigidity of String Theory,

    N. Arkani-Hamed, C. Cheung, C. Figueiredo, and G. N. Remmen, “Multiparticle Factorization and the Rigidity of String Theory,”Phys. Rev. Lett.132(2024) 091601, arXiv:2312.07652 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  32. [32]

    Multipositivity bounds for scattering amplitudes,

    C. Cheung and G. N. Remmen, “Multipositivity bounds for scattering amplitudes,”Phys. Rev. D112(2025) 016017,arXiv:2505.05553 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    Flattening of the EFT-hedron: supersymmetric positivity bounds and the search for string theory,

    J. Berman, H. Elvang, and A. Herderschee, “Flattening of the EFT-hedron: supersymmetric positivity bounds and the search for string theory,”JHEP03(2024) 021, arXiv:2310.10729 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  34. [34]

    Boot- strapping Extremal Scalar Amplitudes With and With- 10 out Supersymmetry,

    J. Berman, H. Elvang, N. Geiser, and L. L. Lin, “Boot- strapping Extremal Scalar Amplitudes With and With- 10 out Supersymmetry,”arXiv:2412.13368 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  35. [35]

    Corners and islands in the S-matrix bootstrap of the open superstring,

    J. Berman and H. Elvang, “Corners and islands in the S-matrix bootstrap of the open superstring,”JHEP09 (2024) 076,arXiv:2406.03543 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  36. [36]

    String Theory from Maximal Supersymmetry,

    H. Elvang, A. Herderschee, and R. Morales, “String Theory from Maximal Supersymmetry,” arXiv:2601.11705 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  37. [37]

    Reaction amplitude for n-mesons: A generalization of the Veneziano-Bardakçi- Ruegg-Virasoro model,

    Z. Koba and H. B. Nielsen, “Reaction amplitude for n-mesons: A generalization of the Veneziano-Bardakçi- Ruegg-Virasoro model,”Nucl. Phys. B10(1969) 633

    1969

  38. [38]

    Reggeized resonance model for the production amplitude,

    K. Bardakçi and H. Ruegg, “Reggeized resonance model for the production amplitude,”Phys. Lett. B28(1968) 342

    1968

  39. [39]

    Explicit construction of theN-point function in the generalized Veneziano model,

    H.-M. Chan and S. T. Tsou, “Explicit construction of theN-point function in the generalized Veneziano model,”Phys. Lett. B28(1969) 485

    1969

  40. [40]

    Open string amplitudes: singularities, asymp- totics and new representations,

    N. Arkani-Hamed, C. Figueiredo, and G. N. Rem- men, “Open string amplitudes: singularities, asymp- totics and new representations,”JHEP04(2025) 039, arXiv:2412.20639 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    Binary geometries, generalized particles and strings, and cluster algebras,

    N. Arkani-Hamed, S. He, T. Lam, and H. Thomas, “Binary geometries, generalized particles and strings, and cluster algebras,”Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 066015, arXiv:1912.11764 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  42. [42]

    All loop scattering as a counting problem,

    N.Arkani-Hamed, H.Frost, G.Salvatori, P.-G.Plamon- don, and H. Thomas, “All loop scattering as a counting problem,”JHEP08(2025) 194,arXiv:2309.15913 [hep- th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  43. [43]

    Stringy canoni- cal forms,

    N. Arkani-Hamed, S. He, and T. Lam, “Stringy canoni- cal forms,”JHEP02(2021) 069,arXiv:1912.08707 [hep- th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  44. [44]

    Scalar-scaffolded gluons and the combinatorial origins of Yang-Mills theory,

    N. Arkani-Hamed, Q. Cao, J. Dong, C. Figueiredo, and S. He, “Scalar-scaffolded gluons and the combinatorial origins of Yang-Mills theory,”JHEP04(2025) 078, arXiv:2401.00041 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  45. [45]

    Hidden zeros for particle/string amplitudes and the unity of colored scalars, pions and gluons,

    N. Arkani-Hamed, Q. Cao, J. Dong, C. Figueiredo, and S. He, “Hidden zeros for particle/string amplitudes and the unity of colored scalars, pions and gluons,”JHEP 10(2024) 231,arXiv:2312.16282 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  46. [46]

    All-order splits and multi-soft limits for particle and string amplitudes,

    N. Arkani-Hamed and C. Figueiredo, “All-order splits and multi-soft limits for particle and string amplitudes,” arXiv:2405.09608 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  47. [47]

    The High-Energy Behav- ior of String Scattering Amplitudes,

    D. J. Gross and P. F. Mende, “The High-Energy Behav- ior of String Scattering Amplitudes,”Phys. Lett. B197 (1987) 129

    1987

  48. [48]

    AbelianZ-theory: NLSM amplitudes andα ′- corrections from the open string,

    J. J. M. Carrasco, C. R. Mafra, and O. Schlot- terer, “AbelianZ-theory: NLSM amplitudes andα ′- corrections from the open string,”JHEP06(2017) 093, arXiv:1608.02569 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  49. [49]

    The bosonic string spectrum and the ex- plicit states up to level 10 from the lightcone and the chaotic behavior of certain string amplitudes,

    I. Pesando, “The bosonic string spectrum and the ex- plicit states up to level 10 from the lightcone and the chaotic behavior of certain string amplitudes,”Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) 371,arXiv:2405.09987 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  50. [50]

    String Theory Beyond the Planck Scale,

    D. J. Gross and P. F. Mende, “String Theory Beyond the Planck Scale,”Nucl. Phys. B303(1988) 407

    1988

  51. [51]

    Positivity of Curvature-Squared Corrections in Gravity,

    C. Cheung and G. N. Remmen, “Positivity of Curvature-Squared Corrections in Gravity,”Phys. Rev. Lett.118(2017) 051601,arXiv:1608.02942 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  52. [52]

    Single-valued integra- tion and superstring amplitudes in genus zero,

    F. Brown and C. Dupont, “Single-valued integra- tion and superstring amplitudes in genus zero,”Com- mun. Math. Phys.382(2021) 815,arXiv:1910.01107 [math.NT]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  53. [53]

    AdS Virasoro- Shapiro from single-valued periods,

    L. F. Alday, T. Hansen, and J. A. Silva, “AdS Virasoro- Shapiro from single-valued periods,”JHEP12(2022) 010,arXiv:2209.06223 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  54. [54]

    Emergent Worldsheet for the AdS Virasoro-Shapiro Amplitude,

    L. F. Alday, T. Hansen, and J. A. Silva, “Emergent Worldsheet for the AdS Virasoro-Shapiro Amplitude,” Phys. Rev. Lett.131(2023) 161603,arXiv:2305.03593 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  55. [55]

    The AdS Virasoro-Shapiro amplitude,

    L. F. Alday and T. Hansen, “The AdS Virasoro-Shapiro amplitude,”JHEP10(2023) 023,arXiv:2306.12786 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  56. [56]

    Single-valuedness of the AdS Veneziano amplitude,

    L. F. Alday and T. Hansen, “Single-valuedness of the AdS Veneziano amplitude,”JHEP08(2024) 108, arXiv:2404.16084 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  57. [57]

    The AdS Veneziano amplitude at small curvature,

    L. F. Alday, S. M. Chester, T. Hansen, and D.-l. Zhong, “The AdS Veneziano amplitude at small curvature,” JHEP05(2024) 322,arXiv:2403.13877 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2024

  58. [58]

    Bootstrap AdS Veneziano Amplitude with ArbitraryKaluza-KleinModes,

    B. Wang, “Bootstrap AdS Veneziano Amplitude with ArbitraryKaluza-KleinModes,”arXiv:2508.14968 [hep- th]

    arXiv