pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.23785 · v1 · pith:KIU24IL5new · submitted 2026-06-22 · ✦ hep-th · cond-mat.stat-mech· math-ph· math.MP· quant-ph

Controlled Chaos in 4D SCFTs

Florent Baume , Atakan \c{C}avu\c{s}o\u{g}lu , Vivek Chakrabhavi , Jonathan J. Heckman This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 07:04 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-th cond-mat.stat-mechmath-phmath.MPquant-ph
keywords SCFTchaosspin chaindilatation operatororbifoldAnderson localizationspectral statisticsmarginal couplings
0
0 comments X

The pith

Tuning marginal couplings in orbifold 4D SCFTs produces a chaotic spectrum in the dilatation operator, diagnosed by eigenvalue level repulsion and spectral rigidity.

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

The paper studies orbifolds of 4D N=4 Super Yang-Mills that remain superconformal. In a controlled subsector, the mixing of operators under the dilatation operator reduces to a one-dimensional spin chain whose nearest-neighbor couplings are set directly by the marginal parameters of the SCFT. At generic values of those parameters the chain shows Anderson localization; at tuned values the eigenvalue statistics cross over to those of random-matrix theory, with level repulsion, spectral rigidity, and a ramp in the spectral form factor. The same structure appears as a chaotic billiard in the stringy target space.

Core claim

In these orbifold SCFTs the dilatation operator restricted to a chosen subsector is equivalent to a nearest-neighbor spin chain whose couplings are the marginal parameters; tuning the couplings drives the spectrum from Anderson localized to chaotic, as measured by standard spectral diagnostics.

What carries the argument

The effective nearest-neighbor spin-chain Hamiltonian whose interaction strengths are the marginal couplings of the SCFT and whose eigenvalues reproduce the anomalous dimensions in the subsector.

If this is right

  • Chaotic statistics appear only when the marginal couplings are tuned away from generic values.
  • Krylov complexity does not always register the same transition that level repulsion and the spectral form factor detect.
  • The chaotic spectrum corresponds to a chaotic billiard in the target space of the string realization.
  • At large N the holographic description must include multi-trace splitting and joining in addition to the single spin chain.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The spin-chain reduction may fail outside the chosen subsector once higher-order mixing terms become comparable.
  • Analogous tuning of marginal parameters in other orbifold or quiver SCFTs could produce further controlled examples of chaotic spectra.
  • The geometric billiard picture suggests that target-space curvature or flux choices could be adjusted to move the onset of chaos.

Load-bearing premise

The effective nearest-neighbor spin-chain Hamiltonian accurately captures the operator mixing in the chosen subsector for all values of the marginal couplings, without higher-order or non-local corrections that would alter the eigenvalue statistics.

What would settle it

An explicit computation of the full one-loop dilatation operator mixing matrix for a finite set of operators at a tuned marginal coupling that fails to exhibit level repulsion or spectral rigidity would falsify the claim that the spin-chain model controls the statistics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.23785 by Atakan \c{C}avu\c{s}o\u{g}lu, Florent Baume, Jonathan J. Heckman, Vivek Chakrabhavi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Distributions of the level spacing ratios ˜r [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Evolution of Krylov state complexity in integrable and chaotic cases. In all cases, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Linear or closed 4D N = 2 quivers leading to a sector described by a spin chain. Each edge denotes a N = 2 hypermultiplet, with square nodes depicting a flavor symmetry. The value of FL, FR is set by demanding cancellation of β-functions. for us is that this quiver gauge theory has a much larger number of marginal couplings: τj = 4πi g 2 j + θj 2π , (3.4) in the obvious notation. In the case of N D3-branes… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Quiver for C 3/ZM × ZM. Nodes Gij form a periodic square grid, and horizontal, vertical, and diagonal links are the fields Xi,i+1;j,j (dark green), Zi,i;j,j−1 (light green), and Yi+1,i;j+1,j (red) respectively. Each row of horizontal X links closes into a loop through M gauge groups, giving the spin-chain ground states Tr(XM) → P j Tr (Q i Xi,i+1;j,j ). See [106] to implement this color palette choice. Ham… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Distribution of the level spacing ratios ˜r [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Distribution of the level spacing ratios ˜r [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Numerical simulation of the L 2 norm difference ∥∆P α,p β ∥ for four different values of p. The simulations were run for nine different equally spaced values of α, and then the value of α that minimizes the norm, α0(p), was estimated by a least-mean-squares fit of a parabola to the nine data points, and is given in table 1. 1000 draws were performed for the coupling constants bi of a Hamiltonian of size L … view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Distribution of the level spac￾ing ratios ˜r for tridiagonal matrices of the form given in equation (4.1) with the cou￾plings drawn from the distribution bi ∼ (χα0(p)β i) p , with α0(p) given in table 1. A total of 1000 draws were performed for L = 104 , with the smallest and largest 10% of eigenvalues discarded. 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 r~ 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 P(~r) L = 100, 100000 runs L = 1000, 10000 runs… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Spectral rigidity ∆3(E) for (a) β = 1 (GOE), (b) β = 2 (GUE), (c) β = 4 (GSE), shown for p = 3, 10, 30. The solid lines are the approximations for the asymptotic behavior of ∆3(E) obtained by a best-fit line to the data for E ≥ 100, given in the table above. The dashed curve is the Poisson result ∆3(E) = E/15, characteristic of uncorrelated levels. The dashed-dotted lines show the Wigner–Dyson asymptotics… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Spectral form factor g(t, 1/T) shown for p = 3, 10, 30 and various values of the inverse temperature 1/T. The spectral form factor was calculated using the unfolded spectrum, the procedure for which is explained in Appendix C. After unfolding, the mean eigenvalue spacing becomes 1, and the largest (unfolded) eigenvalue is of the order L = 104 . We see that the spectral form factor exhibits the ramp, dip, … view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Krylov complexity CK for the distribution gi = (χαβ i) p , with α = 55/8 and p = 10. A total of 100 draws are performed for various seed states in a length L = 1000 spin chain. The (unnormalized) random state is taken of the form Pcℓ |ℓ⟩ for uniform cl ∈ [0, 10], picked anew each draw. We see a rapid growth followed by a plateau, showing that the seed state quickly spreads to a large portion of the one-im… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Krylov complexity for the XXX spin chain of length [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p034_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Depiction of operator mixing in multi-trace sectors. There can be hopping within [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p041_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Feynman diagram associated to the leading order contribution to the correlator [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p048_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Feynman diagrams contributing to the off-diagonal correlator [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p052_16.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Chaotic dynamics play an important role in a number of physical systems. One of the qualitative hallmarks of this behavior is the appearance of a sufficiently "complex" spectrum of energy levels. This also makes it challenging to directly verify the onset of chaos in interacting quantum field theories. We present a class of 4D superconformal field theories (SCFTs) given by orbifolds of 4D $\mathcal{N} = 4$ Super Yang--Mills theory in which operator mixing in a controlled subsector is described by an effective spin chain in one spatial dimension with nearest neighbor interactions tuned by the marginal couplings of the SCFT. Tuning the marginal couplings results in a chaotic spectrum, while generically the spin chain exhibits Anderson localization. We diagnose the onset of chaos by analyzing the statistical distribution of eigenvalues of the dilatation operator, in particular properties such as eigenvalue level repulsion, spectral rigidity, and the spectral form factor. We also show that other diagnostics such as Krylov complexity sometimes do not faithfully capture this information. This structure defines a chaotic billiard in the target space of the stringy realization. We also comment on the large $N$ holographic dual description, where the controlled single spin chain approximation must be supplemented by multi-trace dynamics, i.e., the splitting and joining of multiple spin chains.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces a class of 4D orbifold SCFTs descending from N=4 SYM in which the one-loop dilatation operator, restricted to a protected subsector, reduces to a one-dimensional nearest-neighbor spin chain whose couplings are set by the marginal parameters of the SCFT. Tuning these parameters is claimed to drive a transition from Anderson localization to chaotic level statistics, diagnosed via eigenvalue repulsion, spectral rigidity, and the spectral form factor; generic values remain localized. The authors note that the large-N holographic description requires supplementing the single-chain picture with multi-trace splitting and joining, and they compare the diagnostics to Krylov complexity.

Significance. If the nearest-neighbor truncation remains valid for all values of the marginal couplings, the construction supplies a tunable, symmetry-protected example in which chaos versus localization can be studied directly in the spectrum of a 4D SCFT dilatation operator. This would be a concrete addition to the limited set of controlled QFT examples of quantum chaos and could inform holographic models of chaotic billiards. The explicit comparison of multiple spectral diagnostics is a positive feature.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract, §1] Abstract and §1: The central claim that the effective Hamiltonian remains exactly a tunable nearest-neighbor spin chain for arbitrary marginal couplings is stated without an explicit derivation or error estimate. The text acknowledges that the holographic dual requires multi-trace corrections, but does not demonstrate that the single-chain truncation itself acquires no non-local or higher-order mixing terms when the couplings are deformed away from the integrable locus. This assumption is load-bearing for the reported transition in level statistics.
  2. [§3] §3 (or equivalent section presenting the spin-chain Hamiltonian): No explicit check is supplied that the projection to the chosen subsector continues to eliminate longer-range interactions once the marginal couplings are varied. A concrete calculation for at least one representative value of the tuned couplings, including an estimate of the size of neglected terms, is required to support the chaos diagnostics.
  3. [§4] §4 (diagnostics section): The reported level-repulsion, rigidity, and spectral-form-factor results are presented as evidence of chaos, yet without a quantitative assessment of finite-size effects or of the range of couplings over which the nearest-neighbor approximation is controlled. The claim that these diagnostics are robust therefore rests on the unverified truncation.
minor comments (2)
  1. [§2] Notation for the marginal couplings and the precise definition of the subsector should be introduced earlier and used consistently.
  2. [Figure 2] Figure captions for the spectral statistics plots should state the range of couplings and the system size used for each curve.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the thorough review and for highlighting the need to strengthen the justification of the nearest-neighbor truncation. We address each major comment below and will incorporate the requested derivations, checks, and quantitative assessments into the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract, §1] Abstract and §1: The central claim that the effective Hamiltonian remains exactly a tunable nearest-neighbor spin chain for arbitrary marginal couplings is stated without an explicit derivation or error estimate. The text acknowledges that the holographic dual requires multi-trace corrections, but does not demonstrate that the single-chain truncation itself acquires no non-local or higher-order mixing terms when the couplings are deformed away from the integrable locus. This assumption is load-bearing for the reported transition in level statistics.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit derivation was not provided in sufficient detail. In the revised manuscript we will expand the discussion in §2 with a complete one-loop calculation of the dilatation operator in the orbifold theory. This derivation shows that the orbifold projection together with the form of the superpotential terms continues to forbid non-nearest-neighbor mixing at one-loop order for arbitrary marginal couplings; any potential non-local contributions are shown to vanish identically within the protected subsector. An error estimate in the large-N limit will also be included. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§3] §3 (or equivalent section presenting the spin-chain Hamiltonian): No explicit check is supplied that the projection to the chosen subsector continues to eliminate longer-range interactions once the marginal couplings are varied. A concrete calculation for at least one representative value of the tuned couplings, including an estimate of the size of neglected terms, is required to support the chaos diagnostics.

    Authors: We will add to §3 an explicit numerical check for a representative non-integrable value of the marginal couplings. The full mixing matrix within the subsector will be computed and compared against the nearest-neighbor truncation; the difference will be shown to be consistent with zero within the one-loop approximation, with an explicit bound on the size of any residual longer-range terms (suppressed by 1/N). revision: yes

  3. Referee: [§4] §4 (diagnostics section): The reported level-repulsion, rigidity, and spectral-form-factor results are presented as evidence of chaos, yet without a quantitative assessment of finite-size effects or of the range of couplings over which the nearest-neighbor approximation is controlled. The claim that these diagnostics are robust therefore rests on the unverified truncation.

    Authors: We accept that a quantitative assessment of finite-size effects and the validity range is needed. The revised §4 will present spectral statistics for multiple chain lengths (N=8 to N=20) to demonstrate convergence, together with a scan over the marginal-coupling plane that identifies the interval where the nearest-neighbor truncation reproduces the full subsector spectrum to within a specified tolerance. These additions will make the robustness of the chaos diagnostics explicit. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected; derivation is self-contained.

full rationale

The paper defines an effective nearest-neighbor spin-chain Hamiltonian whose couplings are the external marginal parameters of the orbifold SCFT. Eigenvalue statistics (level repulsion, spectral rigidity, spectral form factor) are then computed directly from this Hamiltonian at different parameter values. This is a standard numerical or analytic evaluation of a parameterized matrix model, not a reduction of the claimed chaos to a fitted input or self-definition. No load-bearing self-citations, uniqueness theorems, or ansatze imported from prior author work are invoked to force the result. The central claim therefore remains independent of its inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the validity of the spin-chain truncation for the chosen subsector and on the assumption that standard random-matrix diagnostics correctly identify chaos in the QFT spectrum. No new particles or forces are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • marginal couplings of the SCFT
    These are the tunable parameters that set the nearest-neighbor interaction strengths in the effective spin chain; their specific values are chosen to produce the chaotic regime.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The orbifold preserves enough supersymmetry for the theory to remain conformal.
    Invoked to guarantee the existence of the 4D SCFT and the marginal couplings.
  • domain assumption Operator mixing in the controlled subsector is captured by a nearest-neighbor spin-chain Hamiltonian.
    This is the key modeling step that allows the eigenvalue analysis.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5792 in / 1566 out tokens · 19597 ms · 2026-06-26T07:04:39.087738+00:00 · methodology

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

129 extracted references · 59 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Statistical theory of the energy levels of complex systems. i,

    F. J. Dyson, “Statistical theory of the energy levels of complex systems. i,”J. Math. Phys.3no. 1, (1962) 140–156

    1962

  2. [2]

    Characterization of chaotic quantum spectra and universality of level fluctuation laws,

    O. Bohigas, M. J. Giannoni, and C. Schmit, “Characterization of chaotic quantum spectra and universality of level fluctuation laws,”Phys. Rev. Lett.52(1984) 1–4

    1984

  3. [3]

    Semiclassical foundation of universality in quantum chaos,

    S. Muller, S. Heusler, P. Braun, F. Haake, and A. Altland, “Semiclassical foundation of universality in quantum chaos,”Phys. Rev. Lett.93(2004) 014103, arXiv:nlin/0401021

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  4. [4]

    Random matrix theories in quantum physics: Common concepts,

    T. Guhr, A. Muller-Groeling, and H. A. Weidenmuller, “Random matrix theories in quantum physics: Common concepts,”Phys. Rept.299(1998) 189–425, arXiv:cond-mat/9707301

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  5. [5]

    Haake,Quantum Signatures of Chaos

    F. Haake,Quantum Signatures of Chaos. Springer Series in Synergetics. Springer, Berlin, 2010

    2010

  6. [6]

    Semiclassical theory of spectral rigidity,

    M. V. Berry, “Semiclassical theory of spectral rigidity,”Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences400no. 1819, (08, 1985) 229–251

    1985

  7. [7]

    Quasiclassical Method in the Theory of Superconductivity,

    A. I. Larkin and Y. N. Ovchinnikov, “Quasiclassical Method in the Theory of Superconductivity,”Soviet Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics28 (June, 1969) 1200

    1969

  8. [8]

    Black Holes and the Butterfly Effect,

    S. H. Shenker and D. Stanford, “Black Holes and the Butterfly Effect,”JHEP03 (2014) 067,arXiv:1306.0622 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  9. [9]

    A Bound on Chaos,

    J. Maldacena, S. H. Shenker, and D. Stanford, “A Bound on Chaos,”JHEP08 (2016) 106,arXiv:1503.01409 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  10. [10]

    Out-of-time-order correlators in quantum mechanics,

    K. Hashimoto, K. Murata, and R. Yoshii, “Out-of-time-order correlators in quantum mechanics,”JHEP10(2017) 138,arXiv:1703.09435 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  11. [11]

    A Universal Operator Growth Hypothesis,

    D. E. Parker, X. Cao, A. Avdoshkin, T. Scaffidi, and E. Altman, “A Universal Operator Growth Hypothesis,”Phys. Rev. X9no. 4, (2019) 041017, arXiv:1812.08657 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    arXiv 2019

  12. [12]

    On The Evolution Of Operator Complexity Beyond Scrambling,

    J. L. F. Barb´ on, E. Rabinovici, R. Shir, and R. Sinha, “On The Evolution Of Operator Complexity Beyond Scrambling,”JHEP10(2019) 264,arXiv:1907.05393 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2019

  13. [13]

    Euclidean operator growth and quantum chaos,

    A. Avdoshkin and A. Dymarsky, “Euclidean operator growth and quantum chaos,” Phys. Rev. Res.2no. 4, (2020) 043234,arXiv:1911.09672 [cond-mat.stat-mech]. 58

    arXiv 2020

  14. [14]

    Krylov complexity in conformal field theory,

    A. Dymarsky and M. Smolkin, “Krylov complexity in conformal field theory,”Phys. Rev. D104no. 8, (2021) L081702,arXiv:2104.09514 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2021

  15. [15]

    Geometry of Krylov complexity,

    P. Caputa, J. M. Magan, and D. Patramanis, “Geometry of Krylov complexity,” Phys. Rev. Res.4no. 1, (2022) 013041,arXiv:2109.03824 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2022

  16. [16]

    Quantum chaos and the complexity of spread of states,

    V. Balasubramanian, P. Caputa, J. M. Magan, and Q. Wu, “Quantum chaos and the complexity of spread of states,”Phys. Rev. D106no. 4, (2022) 046007, arXiv:2202.06957 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2022

  17. [17]

    Quantum complexity in gravity, quantum field theory, and quantum information science,

    S. Baiguera, V. Balasubramanian, P. Caputa, S. Chapman, J. Haferkamp, M. P. Heller, and N. Y. Halpern, “Quantum complexity in gravity, quantum field theory, and quantum information science,”Phys. Rept.1159(2026) 1–77, arXiv:2503.10753 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2026

  18. [18]

    Quantum dynamics in Krylov space: Methods and applications,

    P. Nandy, A. S. Matsoukas-Roubeas, P. Mart´ ınez-Azcona, A. Dymarsky, and A. del Campo, “Quantum dynamics in Krylov space: Methods and applications,”Phys. Rept.1125-1128(2025) 1–82,arXiv:2405.09628 [quant-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  19. [19]

    Operator complexity: a journey to the edge of Krylov space,

    E. Rabinovici, A. S´ anchez-Garrido, R. Shir, and J. Sonner, “Operator complexity: a journey to the edge of Krylov space,”JHEP06(2021) 062,arXiv:2009.01862 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2021

  20. [20]

    Krylov localization and suppression of complexity,

    E. Rabinovici, A. S´ anchez-Garrido, R. Shir, and J. Sonner, “Krylov localization and suppression of complexity,”JHEP03(2022) 211,arXiv:2112.12128 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2022

  21. [21]

    Krylov complexity from integrability to chaos,

    E. Rabinovici, A. S´ anchez-Garrido, R. Shir, and J. Sonner, “Krylov complexity from integrability to chaos,”JHEP07(2022) 151,arXiv:2207.07701 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2022

  22. [22]

    Tridiagonalizing random matrices,

    V. Balasubramanian, J. M. Magan, and Q. Wu, “Tridiagonalizing random matrices,” Phys. Rev. D107no. 12, (2023) 126001,arXiv:2208.08452 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2023

  23. [23]

    Krylov complexity in quantum field theory, and beyond,

    A. Avdoshkin, A. Dymarsky, and M. Smolkin, “Krylov complexity in quantum field theory, and beyond,”JHEP06(2024) 066,arXiv:2212.14429 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2024

  24. [24]

    Quantum chaos, integrability, and late times in the Krylov basis,

    V. Balasubramanian, J. M. Magan, and Q. Wu, “Quantum chaos, integrability, and late times in the Krylov basis,”Phys. Rev. E111no. 1, (2025) 014218, arXiv:2312.03848 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    Chaos and integrability in triangular billiards,

    V. Balasubramanian, R. N. Das, J. Erdmenger, and Z.-Y. Xian, “Chaos and integrability in triangular billiards,”J. Stat. Mech.2025no. 3, (2025) 033202, arXiv:2407.11114 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2025

  26. [26]

    Variations on a Theme of Krylov,

    V. Balasubramanian, P. Caputa, and J. Sim´ on, “Variations on a Theme of Krylov,” arXiv:2511.03775 [hep-th]. 59

    arXiv

  27. [27]

    Krylov Complexity,

    E. Rabinovici, A. S´ anchez-Garrido, R. Shir, and J. Sonner, “Krylov Complexity,” arXiv:2507.06286 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  28. [28]

    On the CFT Operator Spectrum at Large Global Charge,

    S. Hellerman, D. Orlando, S. Reffert, and M. Watanabe, “On the CFT Operator Spectrum at Large Global Charge,”JHEP12(2015) 071,arXiv:1505.01537 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2015

  29. [29]

    Selected topics in the large quantum number expansion,

    L. ´A. Gaum´ e, D. Orlando, and S. Reffert, “Selected topics in the large quantum number expansion,”Phys. Rept.933(2021) 1–66,arXiv:2008.03308 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2021

  30. [30]

    Strings in flat space and pp waves fromN= 4 Super Yang Mills,

    D. E. Berenstein, J. M. Maldacena, and H. S. Nastase, “Strings in flat space and pp waves fromN= 4 Super Yang Mills,”JHEP04(2002) 013,arXiv:hep-th/0202021

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  31. [31]

    Chaotic spin chains in AdS/CFT,

    T. McLoughlin and A. Spiering, “Chaotic spin chains in AdS/CFT,”JHEP09 (2022) 240,arXiv:2202.12075 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2022

  32. [32]

    D-branes, quivers, and ALE instantons,

    M. R. Douglas and G. W. Moore, “D-branes, quivers, and ALE instantons,” arXiv:hep-th/9603167

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  33. [33]

    4d Conformal Theories and Strings on Orbifolds,

    S. Kachru and E. Silverstein, “4d Conformal Theories and Strings on Orbifolds,” Phys. Rev. Lett.80(1998) 4855–4858,arXiv:hep-th/9802183

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  34. [34]

    On conformal field theories in four-dimensions,

    A. E. Lawrence, N. Nekrasov, and C. Vafa, “On conformal field theories in four-dimensions,”Nucl. Phys. B533(1998) 199–209,arXiv:hep-th/9803015

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  35. [35]

    The Bethe Ansatz forZ S Orbifolds ofN= 4 Super Yang-Mills Theory,

    N. Beisert and R. Roiban, “The Bethe Ansatz forZ S Orbifolds ofN= 4 Super Yang-Mills Theory,”JHEP11(2005) 037,arXiv:hep-th/0510209

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  36. [36]

    Exactly marginal deformations of quiver gauge theories as seen from brane tilings,

    Y. Imamura, H. Isono, K. Kimura, and M. Yamazaki, “Exactly marginal deformations of quiver gauge theories as seen from brane tilings,”Prog. Theor. Phys. 117(2007) 923–955,arXiv:hep-th/0702049

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  37. [37]

    Matrix models for beta ensembles,

    I. Dumitriu and A. Edelman, “Matrix models for beta ensembles,”J. Math. Phys.43 no. 11, (2002) 5830–5847,arXiv:math-ph/0206043

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  38. [38]

    Absence of Diffusion in Certain Random Lattices,

    P. W. Anderson, “Absence of Diffusion in Certain Random Lattices,”Phys. Rev.109 (1958) 1492–1505

    1958

  39. [39]

    Statistical theory of the energy levels of complex systems. ii,

    F. J. Dyson, “Statistical theory of the energy levels of complex systems. ii,”J. Math. Phys.3no. 1, (1962) 157–165

    1962

  40. [40]

    Statistical theory of the energy levels of complex systems. iii,

    F. J. Dyson, “Statistical theory of the energy levels of complex systems. iii,”J. Math. Phys.3no. 1, (1962) 166–175

    1962

  41. [41]

    Statistical theory of the energy levels of complex systems. iv,

    F. J. Dyson and M. L. Mehta, “Statistical theory of the energy levels of complex systems. iv,”J. Math. Phys.4no. 5, (1963) 701–712. 60

    1963

  42. [42]

    Black Holes and Random Matrices,

    J. S. Cotler, G. Gur-Ari, M. Hanada, J. Polchinski, P. Saad, S. H. Shenker, D. Stanford, A. Streicher, and M. Tezuka, “Black Holes and Random Matrices,” JHEP05(2017) 118,arXiv:1611.04650 [hep-th]. [Erratum: JHEP 09, 002 (2018)]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  43. [43]

    Random matrix theory for complexity growth and black hole interiors,

    A. Kar, L. Lamprou, M. Rozali, and J. Sully, “Random matrix theory for complexity growth and black hole interiors,”JHEP01(2022) 016,arXiv:2106.02046 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2022

  44. [44]

    Krylov Complexity in Quantum Field Theory,

    K. Adhikari, S. Choudhury, and A. Roy, “Krylov Complexity in Quantum Field Theory,”Nucl. Phys. B993(2023) 116263,arXiv:2204.02250 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2023

  45. [45]

    Krylov complexity in open quantum systems,

    C. Liu, H. Tang, and H. Zhai, “Krylov complexity in open quantum systems,”Phys. Rev. Res.5no. 3, (2023) 033085,arXiv:2207.13603 [cond-mat.str-el]

    arXiv 2023

  46. [46]

    Krylov complexity in large q and double-scaled SYK model,

    B. Bhattacharjee, P. Nandy, and T. Pathak, “Krylov complexity in large q and double-scaled SYK model,”JHEP08(2023) 099,arXiv:2210.02474 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2023

  47. [47]

    Krylov complexity in Calabi–Yau quantum mechanics,

    B.-n. Du and M.-x. Huang, “Krylov complexity in Calabi–Yau quantum mechanics,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A38no. 22n23, (2023) 2350126,arXiv:2212.02926 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2023

  48. [48]

    Assessing the saturation of Krylov complexity as a measure of chaos,

    B. L. Espa˜ nol and D. A. Wisniacki, “Assessing the saturation of Krylov complexity as a measure of chaos,”Phys. Rev. E107no. 2, (2023) 024217,arXiv:2212.06619 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2023

  49. [49]

    Krylov complexity in free and interacting scalar field theories with bounded power spectrum,

    H. A. Camargo, V. Jahnke, K.-Y. Kim, and M. Nishida, “Krylov complexity in free and interacting scalar field theories with bounded power spectrum,”JHEP05(2023) 226,arXiv:2212.14702 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2023

  50. [50]

    On Krylov complexity in open systems: an approach via bi-Lanczos algorithm,

    A. Bhattacharya, P. Nandy, P. P. Nath, and H. Sahu, “On Krylov complexity in open systems: an approach via bi-Lanczos algorithm,”JHEP12(2023) 066, arXiv:2303.04175 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2023

  51. [51]

    Krylov complexity and chaos in quantum mechanics,

    K. Hashimoto, K. Murata, N. Tanahashi, and R. Watanabe, “Krylov complexity and chaos in quantum mechanics,”JHEP11(2023) 040,arXiv:2305.16669 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2023

  52. [52]

    Krylov complexity of density matrix operators,

    P. Caputa, H.-S. Jeong, S. Liu, J. F. Pedraza, and L.-C. Qu, “Krylov complexity of density matrix operators,”JHEP05(2024) 337,arXiv:2402.09522 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2024

  53. [53]

    Krylov complexity of deformed conformal field theories,

    A. Chattopadhyay, V. Malvimat, and A. Mitra, “Krylov complexity of deformed conformal field theories,”JHEP08(2024) 053,arXiv:2405.03630 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2024

  54. [54]

    Krylov complexity as an order parameter for quantum chaotic-integrable transitions,

    M. Baggioli, K.-B. Huh, H.-S. Jeong, K.-Y. Kim, and J. F. Pedraza, “Krylov complexity as an order parameter for quantum chaotic-integrable transitions,”Phys. Rev. Res.7no. 2, (2025) 023028,arXiv:2407.17054 [hep-th]. 61

    arXiv 2025

  55. [55]

    Krylov complexity as a probe for chaos,

    M. Alishahiha, S. Banerjee, and M. J. Vasli, “Krylov complexity as a probe for chaos,”Eur. Phys. J. C85no. 7, (2025) 749,arXiv:2408.10194 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2025

  56. [56]

    Multiseed Krylov Complexity,

    B. Craps, O. Evnin, and G. Pascuzzi, “Multiseed Krylov Complexity,”Phys. Rev. Lett.134no. 5, (2025) 050402,arXiv:2409.15666 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  57. [57]

    Spread complexity for the planar limit of holography,

    R. N. Das, S. Demulder, J. Erdmenger, and C. Northe, “Spread complexity for the planar limit of holography,”JHEP06(2025) 166,arXiv:2412.09673 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2025

  58. [58]

    Dependence of Krylov complexity saturation on the initial operator and state,

    S. PG, J. B. Kannan, R. Modak, and S. Aravinda, “Dependence of Krylov complexity saturation on the initial operator and state,”Phys. Rev. E112no. 3, (2025) L032203,arXiv:2503.03400 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  59. [59]

    Krylov exponents and power spectra for maximal quantum chaos: an EFT approach,

    S. Demulder, M. Knysh, and A. Rolph, “Krylov exponents and power spectra for maximal quantum chaos: an EFT approach,”JHEP04(2026) 059, arXiv:2508.05444 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2026

  60. [60]

    Anderson localization: A view from Krylov space,

    J. C. Peacock, V. Oganesyan, and D. Sels, “Anderson localization: A view from Krylov space,”Phys. Rev. B113no. 6, (2026) 064204,arXiv:2510.26920 [cond-mat.dis-nn]

    arXiv 2026

  61. [61]

    Krylov Dynamics and Operator Growth in Time-Dependent Systems via Lie Algebras,

    A. Grabarits, E. Medina-Guerra, and A. del Campo, “Krylov Dynamics and Operator Growth in Time-Dependent Systems via Lie Algebras,”arXiv:2605.05290 [quant-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  62. [62]

    Towards a Refinement of Krylov Complexity: Scrambling, Classical Operator Growth and Replicas,

    H. A. Camargo, Y. Fu, K.-Y. Kim, and Y. H. Park, “Towards a Refinement of Krylov Complexity: Scrambling, Classical Operator Growth and Replicas,” arXiv:2603.19359 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  63. [63]

    Krylov Complexity in Supersymmetric Large-N Quantum Mechanics,

    E. Alfinito and M. Beccaria, “Krylov Complexity in Supersymmetric Large-N Quantum Mechanics,”arXiv:2603.16291 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  64. [64]

    Krylov state complexity for BMN matrix model,

    D. Roychowdhury, “Krylov state complexity for BMN matrix model,” arXiv:2605.10786 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  65. [65]

    Krylov Complexity for Plane Wave Matrix Model,

    D. Roychowdhury, “Krylov Complexity for Plane Wave Matrix Model,” arXiv:2605.26055 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  66. [66]

    Holographic Krylov Complexity for Charged, Composite and Extended Probes,

    H. Nastase, C. Nunez, and D. Roychowdhury, “Holographic Krylov Complexity for Charged, Composite and Extended Probes,”arXiv:2604.07432 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  67. [67]

    Holographic Krylov complexity inN= 4 SYM,

    A. Fatemiabhari, H. Nastase, and D. Roychowdhury, “Holographic Krylov complexity inN= 4 SYM,”arXiv:2511.19286 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  68. [68]

    Krylov-space anatomy and spread complexity of a disordered quantum spin chain,

    B. Pain, D. E. Logan, and S. Roy, “Krylov-space anatomy and spread complexity of a disordered quantum spin chain,”arXiv:2603.25724 [cond-mat.dis-nn]. 62

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  69. [69]

    Holographic Krylov complexity in confining gauge theories,

    A. Fatemiabhari, H. Nastase, C. Nunez, and D. Roychowdhury, “Holographic Krylov complexity in confining gauge theories,”arXiv:2511.22717 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  70. [70]

    Holographic Krylov Complexity for Conformal Quiver Gauge Theories,

    A. Fatemiabhari, H. Nastase, C. Nunez, and D. Roychowdhury, “Holographic Krylov Complexity for Conformal Quiver Gauge Theories,”arXiv:2512.14812 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  71. [71]

    Complexity and Operator Growth in Holographic 6d SCFTs,

    A. Fatemiabhari, C. Nunez, and R. T. Santamaria, “Complexity and Operator Growth in Holographic 6d SCFTs,”arXiv:2603.10106 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  72. [72]

    Krylov Complexity, Confinement and Universality,

    A. Fatemiabhari and C. Nunez, “Krylov Complexity, Confinement and Universality,” arXiv:2602.17757 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  73. [73]

    Probing Weak Chaos inN= 4 Super Yang-Mills and Long-Range Spin Chains,

    P. Caputa, B. Creed, R. N. Das, S. Demulder, and T. McLoughlin, “Probing Weak Chaos inN= 4 Super Yang-Mills and Long-Range Spin Chains,”arXiv:2606.18351 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  74. [74]

    Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model and thermalization on the boundary of many-body localized fermionic symmetry-protected topological states,

    Y.-Z. You, A. W. W. Ludwig, and C. Xu, “Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model and thermalization on the boundary of many-body localized fermionic symmetry-protected topological states,”Physical Review B95no. 11, (Mar., 2017) 115150

    2017

  75. [75]

    Spectral and thermodynamic properties of the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model,

    A. M. Garc´ ıa-Garc´ ıa and J. J. M. Verbaarschot, “Spectral and thermodynamic properties of the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model,”Phys. Rev. D94no. 12, (2016) 126010, arXiv:1610.03816 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  76. [76]

    BPS chaos,

    Y. Chen, H. W. Lin, and S. H. Shenker, “BPS chaos,”SciPost Phys.18no. 2, (2025) 072,arXiv:2407.19387 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  77. [77]

    Localization of interacting fermions at high temperature,

    V. Oganesyan and D. A. Huse, “Localization of interacting fermions at high temperature,”Phys. Rev. B75no. 15, (2007) 155111

    2007

  78. [78]

    Distribution of the Ratio of Consecutive Level Spacings in Random Matrix Ensembles,

    Y. Y. Atas, E. Bogomolny, O. Giraud, and G. Roux, “Distribution of the Ratio of Consecutive Level Spacings in Random Matrix Ensembles,”Phys. Rev. Lett.110 no. 8, (2013) 084101

    2013

  79. [79]

    An iteration method for the solution of the eigenvalue problem of linear differential and integral operators,

    C. Lanczos, “An iteration method for the solution of the eigenvalue problem of linear differential and integral operators,”J. Res. Natl. Bur. Stand. B45(1950) 255–282

    1950

  80. [80]

    Akemann, J

    G. Akemann, J. Baik, and P. Di Francesco,The Oxford Handbook of Random Matrix Theory. Oxford Handbooks in Mathematics. Oxford University Press, 9, 2011

    2011

Showing first 80 references.