Heavy-Heavy-Light-Light correlators from holography on the worldsheet

Diego H. Correa; Mat\'ias Colaneri; Nicol\'as A. Ivanovich; V\'ictor I. Giraldo-Rivera

REVIEW

Heavy-Heavy-Light-Light correlators from holography on the worldsheet

Matías Colaneri, Diego H. Correa, Víctor I. Giraldo-Rivera, Nicolás A. Ivanovich

High Energy Physics - Theory · Submitted 14 Oct 2026 · 28 references

Pith's verdict: A careful, honest holographic computation of new heavy-light correlators; the central prescription is an unproven ansatz and the checks only probe the small-angle regime, so the conditional verdict is the right one.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash) read the paper on October 15, 2026 and answered a fixed list of questions about it. T0 is the starting level every paper gets. The levels describe how deeply Pith has checked the paper, never the authors.

T0 AI review An AI read the paper and answered a fixed list of questions.
T1 Audit Automatic checks that the references and files the paper relies on exist and match.
T2 Compute The paper's code or calculations re-run with the same results.
T3 Formal statement The claims written out in a formal math language a computer can read.
T4 Proof Those claims proved, and the proof checked by computer.

How Pith checks papers →

· 3 major objections · 3 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv ID2610.20602 (version 1)

Pith ID7LRWKOVB, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationDiego H. Correa, Mat\'ias Colaneri, Nicol\'as A. Ivanovich, V\'ictor I. Giraldo-Rivera. "Heavy-Heavy-Light-Light correlators from holography on the worldsheet." arXiv:2610.20602 (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7LRWKOVB

Cite this reviewBibTeX for Pith's review of this paper

Claim paper

Why Pith says this

Highlight any text to comment on it.

Editor's note

read the letter

Short version: this is a good paper and it should go to referees, but the reader's CONDITIONAL verdict is correct. The genuinely new content is the proposal (3.15): normalized correlators of two defect changing operators and light operators are obtained from functional derivatives of the fluctuation action around the cusped classical string. That formula is not derived from the gauge-theory generating functional Z[J,K]; the authors say so, and the stress-test note is right to flag it. Around it, they execute a lot of nontrivial work: closed-form geometric-cusp functions (3.40)-(3.41), the theta-expansion recursion and the resummed Bessel series (3.57)-(3.62), and the Bose symmetry checks. The small-cusp integrated identities (4.7), (4.23), and (4.27) are derived from the operator definition of the cusps, so the any-coupling claim is credible rather than fitted; the strong-coupling verification against the published four-point functions of [1] is real, and the final cross-ratio dependence matches, not just the divergent part.

The soft spots are real but not fatal. The Section 4 checks run exactly where the DCOs become light and the back-reacted worldsheet degenerates toward AdS2, so they do not test the generic-angle regime where the proposal is new. A cusp-localized contribution whose effect vanishes with the angles would not be detected by these identities. The authors acknowledge the ansatz status, but the paper would be stronger if it stated more bluntly that (3.15) is a conjecture awaiting either a derivation from the generating functional or an independent check in another regime. The geometric-cusp verification also fixes eta = -2 by demanding cancellation of UV divergences, so part of that check is not fully independent; the remaining u-dependent match is still a nontrivial consistency test. Minor point: in the text introducing (3.15), "n-th functional derivative" should be "(n-2)-th", since the formula has n-2 light sources.

The citation pattern looks fine: the ingredients from [1,19,20] are published and used under their stated hypotheses. No code or data is shipped, which is normal for a computation of this kind. The paper is for people working on Wilson line defects, worldsheet methods, and defect CFT; those readers will get real value from the method and from the integrated identities, even if the generic-angle prediction is not yet independently backed.

Recommendation: send it to peer review. The referee should ask for a clearer separation of conjecture from derived result and, if possible, one check outside the small-angle limit; desk rejection would be wrong.

Referee report

Significance

If the prescription is correct, the paper opens a genuinely new regime: strong-coupling correlators in which the heavy DCOs back-react on the worldsheet, with results expressed as functions of the cross-ratio. The technical execution has real merits: the θ=0 case is closed in elementary functions, the generic-angle computation is performed in two independent-looking representations, the dependence on the cross-ratio is checked, and the Bose symmetry relations for the geometric cusp are verified. The small-angle identities (4.7) and (4.23) are interesting in themselves because they are derived from the operator definition of the cusps and are claimed to hold at any coupling. The paper is also transparent about what is assumed: Eq. (3.15) is explicitly labeled a proposal, and the difficulty of a direct holographic prescription for Z[J,K] is acknowledged. These strengths make the paper worth serious consideration, but the evidence for the central proposal is presently limited to consistency checks in the degenerate small-angle limit.

Major objections (3)

[§3, Eqs. (3.14)-(3.15)] The central step is an ansatz. The second functional derivative of the generating functional with respect to DCO sources is identified with the fluctuation path integral around the cusped classical string solution, but no derivation from Z[J,K] in Eqs. (3.1)-(3.2) is given, and no treatment is provided of possible boundary-condition-changing degrees of freedom localized at the cusps. The text acknowledges this by calling Eq. (3.15) a proposal and by noting that a holographic prescription for Z[J,K] is challenging. Since the genuinely new claims of the paper live at generic (φ,θ), where Γ_cusp ~ sqrt(λ) and the worldsheet is strongly deformed, the central result is currently supported only by its internal logic and by small-angle limits. I would ask the authors to either supply a derivation of (3.15), even at a formal level, or to provide an independent test at non-small angles, for example in a parametric limit such as the ladder limit or the fusion limit, where the cusped solution does not degenerate to AdS2. The authors acknowledge this: “For example ⟨ ⟨Cα1(t1)Cα2(t2)Oα3(t3)· · · Oαn(tn)⟩ ⟩= (−1)n δnZ[J, K]δKα1(t1)δKα2(t2)δJα3(t3)· · ·δJαn(tn) J,K=0 ,(3.2) Providing a holographic prescription to computeZ[J, K] appears to be very challenging.”
[§4, Eqs. (4.7), (4.23), (4.8)-(4.15), (4.24)-(4.26)] The strong-coupling verifications are internal consistency checks in a degenerate limit rather than independent tests of the back-reacted prescription. The right-hand sides of (4.7) and (4.23) are evaluated with the light four-point functions of [1], which are themselves obtained from AdS2/Wilson-line worldsheet holography, while the left-hand sides are the small-angle limits of the new cusped computation. The match therefore shows that the new setup reduces correctly to the straight-line fluctuation computation when θ,φ→0, where Γ_cusp→0 and the worldsheet degenerates to AdS2. This is a nontrivial check, but it cannot detect a cusp-localized contribution whose coupling vanishes with the cusp angles, nor an error that also vanishes in the flat limit. The paper should state this limitation explicitly and, preferably, supplement the small-angle check with at least one test in the regime where the back-reaction is essential.
[§3.2, Eqs. (3.57)-(3.62)] The claim that the Bessel-resummed series (3.61)-(3.62) is valid for any value of θ and φ is not accompanied by a convergence or analytic-continuation statement. The derivation interchanges infinite sums in n and m, and for |θ|>π the square roots sqrt(π²m²−θ²) become imaginary for m=1, so the exponential factors in (3.61) cease to decay. The paper should specify the domain of validity of these representations, the branch choices for the square roots, or, if the expressions are meant as analytic continuations in θ, justify the continuation explicitly.

Minor objections (3)

[§4, Eq. (4.12)] The notation 'T^(1)T(v)' should read 'T^(1)T(v)' with an explicit superscript T on the function name; the current typesetting is easy to misread as a product of T^(1) and T.
[§3.1, Eq. (3.37)] The relation between the parameter k and the geometric cusp angle φ is given without a statement of the allowed range of k. Since Eq. (3.37) involves an elliptic integral that can behave singularly, a brief statement of the domain (for example, the range of k corresponding to 0<φ<π) would improve clarity.
[§2, Eqs. (2.11) and (2.22)] The composite operators Φ6 and D1D1 are introduced with constants ζ and η that are later fixed by divergence cancellation. It would help to state explicitly which of these constants is fixed by the matching of physical normalizations and which is genuinely scheme-dependent, since the geometric-cusp verification in §4 depends on the value η=-2.

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

The paper

The paper claims

Defect-changing cusp operators on the N=4 SYM Wilson line are treated as heavy insertions: the paper proposes that their correlators with light operators are functional derivatives of the fluctuation action around the back-reacted cusped…

The reading

A cusp on the 1/2 BPS Wilson line of N=4 super Yang-Mills is a point operator, a defect changing operator, whose scaling dimension is the cusp anomalous dimension and grows like sqrt(lambda) at strong coupling. This paper treats a pair of such operators as genuinely heavy: instead of quantizing light insertions on AdS2, one replaces AdS2 by the classical worldsheet of the cusped string and treats tilt and displacement operators as fluctuations around that back-reacted geometry. The central proposal is that normalized correlators of two cusps with any number of light operators are functional derivatives of the fluctuation on-shell action with respect to the light sources. Working out the case of two light operators gives explicit Heavy-Heavy-Light-Light and Heavy-Light-Heavy-Light functions of the cross-ratio, in closed form for a pure geometric cusp and as two series representations in the generic case. Because the same operators become light when the cusp angles tend to zero, the small-angle expansion yields integral identities among light-only correlators that are claimed to hold at every value of the coupling, and the paper verifies these identities at strong coupling.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the classical cusped string worldsheet in AdS5 x S5, expressed with Jacobi elliptic functions and parametrized by two constants (b,k) that encode the geometrical and internal cusp angles (phi,$\theta$). Around this background the eight transverse fluctuations have a quadratic action with position-dependent couplings, and light operators are imposed as Dirichlet boundary data on the two asymptotic boundaries. The actual correlators are carried by boundary-to-boundary propagators, which for generic angles are the series (3.57)-(3.58) in powers of $theta^{2}$ or the resummed series (3.61)-(3.62) valid for any $\theta$. A second key device is the small-angle representation of the cusp operators as integrals of light operators, which converts heavy-light consistency into integrated identities among correlators of light operators alone.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim, stated around Eq. (3.15), is that the normalized correlator of two heavy defect changing operators with light protected operators is obtained from the path integral of eight transverse fluctuations around the classical cusped string solution, evaluated on shell in the large-$\lambda$ limit. For two light insertions it suffices to keep the action quadratic in fluctuations, and the correlator becomes a boundary-to-boundary propagator on the strip-like worldsheet. In worldsheet coordinates the light fluctuations reduce to massive scalar modes, and the HHLL and HLHL correlators are given by the Fourier integrals (3.29)-(3.30), equivalently by the series (3.61)-(3.62). For a purely geometrical cusp, $\theta$=0, these are inverted in closed form and produce simple $\sinh$^-2 and $\cosh$^-2 functions of the worldsheet time separation, which translate into the cross-ratio functions g(u,phi) and tilde-g(u,phi). The small-angle limit is used as a consistency check: expanding the same DCOs as integrals of light operators produces the coupling-independent integrated identities (4.7) and (4.23), and the strong-coupling evaluation of both sides matches exactly. The authors label (3.15) a proposal and take the small-angle verification as its support.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that inserting two heavy cusp operators is fully equivalent to replacing the AdS2 worldsheet by the classical cusped string solution and quantizing fluctuations around it, with no additional worldsheet degrees of freedom or boundary terms localized at the cusps.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

At strong coupling the prescription yields explicit cross-ratio functions for both HHLL and HLHL four-point correlators: closed forms (3.40)-(3.41) for a purely geometrical cusp, and two complementary series representations for generic cusp angles.
The computed functions satisfy the Bose symmetries g(u,phi)=g(u/(u-1),phi) and tilde-g(u,phi)=tilde-g(1-u,phi), while tilde-g(u,phi) differs from g(1/u,phi), showing that a tilt approaching the cusp from the left and from the right probe different defect OPE channels.
The small-angle consistency conditions (4.7) and (4.23) are coupling-independent, so any valid method of computing integrated light correlators, perturbative, integrable, or bootstrap-based, must reproduce them; their strong-coupling verification is the first check.
Applying the same derivative prescription to higher order in the fluctuation action gives correlators with more light insertions, such as HHLLLL, and generates further integrated identities for six light operators.

Reading between the lines

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

The any-coupling identities could be turned around and used as constraints: once the light-only side is computed independently, they determine the small-angle coefficients f2(u) and g2(u) without invoking the strong-coupling machinery.
The resummed series (3.61)-(3.62) are a natural starting point for the ladder limit i theta to infinity with lambda e^{i theta} held fixed, where ladder-diagram summations are expected to provide an independent check of the proposal.
The failure of tilde-g(u,phi)=g(1/u,phi) is a handle on defect OPE data: the relative size of the left- and right-approach OPE coefficients for the tilt in the cusp channel could be extracted from these formulas and compared with bootstrap bounds.
Near the supersymmetric line phi=+/-theta, where the cusp anomalous dimension vanishes, BPS and unitarity arguments may pin down some of the same correlators and offer a check that does not rely on small-angle expansions.

Original abstract

We study correlation functions of light local operators and defect changing operators on the conformal line set by the 1/2 BPS Wilson line of $\mathcal N=4$ super Yang-Mills. We consider the defect changing operators associated with geometrical and internal cusp angles, which at strong coupling have a large scaling dimension and back-react on the dual $AdS_2$ world-sheet. We set up a holographic computation of correlation functions, in which the light operators are described by fluctuations around the cusped classical string solution, so that correlators of two defect changing operators and an arbitrary number of light protected operators are obtained from the on-shell action of these fluctuations. We implement this prescription in detail for the case of certain 4-point functions, with two light and two defect changing operators. Finally, since for small cusp angles the defect changing operators become light, we manage to derive relations satisfied by integrated correlators of light operators, valid at any coupling. We verify these relations at strong coupling for both internal and geometrical cusps.

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged, kept beside the review and separate from it. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-10-15: 1 request, 5,025 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.04 · states limitation 0.20 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.02 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.07 · compares with prior results 0.22 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

We study correlation functions of light local operators and defect changing operators on the conformal line set by the 1/2 BPS Wilson line of $\mathcal N=4$ super Yang-Mills. We consider the defect changing operators associated with geometrical and internal cusp angles, which at strong coupling have a large scaling dimension and back-react on the dual $AdS_2$ world-sheet. We set up a holographic computation of correlation functions, in which the light operators are described by fluctuations around the cusped classical string solution, so that correlators of two defect changing operators and an arbitrary number of light protected operators are obtained from the on-shell action of these fluctuations. We implement this prescription in detail for the case of certain 4-point functions, with two light and two defect changing operators. Finally, since for small cusp angles the defect changing operators become light, we manage to derive relations satisfied by integrated correlators of light operators, valid at any coupling. We verify these relations at strong coupling for both internal and geometrical cusps.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	We study correlation functions of light local operators and defect changing operators on the conformal line set by the 1/2 BPS Wilson line of $\mathcal N=4$ super Yang-Mills.	contribution 0.93	0.90	0.05	asserted 0.93
s1	We consider the defect changing operators associated with geometrical and internal cusp angles, which at strong coupling have a large scaling dimension and back-react on the dual $AdS_2$ world-sheet.	background 0.61	0.23	0.06	asserted 0.99
s2	We set up a holographic computation of correlation functions, in which the light operators are described by fluctuations around the cusped classical string solution, so that correlators of two defect changing operators and an arbitrary number of light protected operators are obtained from the on-shell action of these fluctuations.	method 0.97	0.93	0.16	asserted 1.00
s3	We implement this prescription in detail for the case of certain 4-point functions, with two light and two defect changing operators.	contribution 0.61	0.94	0.07	asserted 1.00
s4	Finally, since for small cusp angles the defect changing operators become light, we manage to derive relations satisfied by integrated correlators of light operators, valid at any coupling.	result 0.80	0.96	0.39	asserted 1.00
s5	We verify these relations at strong coupling for both internal and geometrical cusps.	result 0.74	0.95	0.19	asserted 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 0.98 · evidence from proof or derivation 0.94.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v1

not examined

full text
figures and tables
references and citing sentences
relations to other papers

levels run

P abstract

not run

S sections
T body sentences
C citations
R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

Figures

**Figure 1.** Mapping a cusped line to two lines. A few comments are in order. First, the treatment of the two boundaries and the reduction of the equations of motion to those of a massive scalar field in flat space is similar to that of fluctuations on a world-sheet ending on two concentric circles [25]. In that case, the results are expressed by a Fourier series rather than a Fourier transform. Second, we use global AdS coordinates in this dual description, so that the world-sheet ends in two parallel lines rather than in a cusped line. Thus, to match both descriptions, it is necessary to…

Figures reproduced from arXiv:2610.20602 by the authors.

References

Works cited (28)

[1]

S. Giombi, R. Roiban and A. A. Tseytlin, Nucl. Phys. B922(2017), 499-527 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2017.07.004 [arXiv:1706.00756 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2017
[2]

N. Drukker and S. Kawamoto, JHEP07(2006), 024 doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2006/07/024

View on Pith doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2006/07/024 2006
[3]

P. Liendo, C. Meneghelli and V. Mitev, JHEP10(2018), 077 doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2018)077 [arXiv:1806.01862 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018
[4]

P. Ferrero and C. Meneghelli, Phys. Rev. D104(2021) no.8, L081703 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.L081703 [arXiv:2103.10440 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2021
[5]

A. Cavagli` a, N. Gromov, J. Julius and M. Preti, Phys. Rev. D105(2022) no.2, L021902 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.L021902 [arXiv:2107.08510 [hep-th]]. 29

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022
[6]

P. Ferrero and C. Meneghelli, JHEP05(2024), 090 doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2024)090 [arXiv:2312.12550 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024
[7]

P. Ferrero and C. Meneghelli, JHEP06(2024), 010 doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2024)010 [arXiv:2312.12551 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024
[8]

A. Cavagli` a, N. Gromov, J. Julius and M. Preti, JHEP05(2022), 164 doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2022)164 [arXiv:2203.09556 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022
[9]

A. Cavagli` a, N. Gromov, J. Julius and M. Preti, JHEP04(2023), 026 doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2023)026 [arXiv:2211.03203 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023
[10]

N. Drukker, JHEP10(2013), 135 doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2013)135 [arXiv:1203.1617 [hep- th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[11]

D. Correa, J. Maldacena and A. Sever, JHEP08(2012), 134 doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2012)134 [arXiv:1203.1913 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012
[12]

N. Gromov and F. Levkovich-Maslyuk, JHEP04(2016), 134 doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2016)134 [arXiv:1510.02098 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2016
[13]

D. Correa, J. Henn, J. Maldacena and A. Sever, JHEP05(2012), 098 doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2012)098 [arXiv:1203.1019 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012
[14]

M. Kim, N. Kiryu, S. Komatsu and T. Nishimura, JHEP12(2017), 055 doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2017)055 [arXiv:1710.07325 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2017
[15]

A. Cavagli` a, N. Gromov and F. Levkovich-Maslyuk, JHEP10(2018), 060 doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2018)060 [arXiv:1802.04237 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018
[16]

L. Bianchi, A. Cavagli` a, A. D. Guti´ errez, S. R. Kousvos and M. Meineri, [arXiv:2609.04035 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[17]

R. A. Lanzetta, I. Moult and Y. Wang, [arXiv:2609.04041 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[18]

R. A. Lanzetta, I. Moult and Y. Wang, [arXiv:2609.04302 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[19]

N. Drukker, S. Giombi, R. Ricci and D. Trancanelli, JHEP05(2008), 017 doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/05/017 [arXiv:0711.3226 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2008
[20]

N. Drukker and V. Forini, JHEP06(2011), 131 doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2011)131 [arXiv:1105.5144 [hep-th]]. 30

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2011
[21]

N. Drukker, D. J. Gross and H. Ooguri, Phys. Rev. D60(1999), 125006 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.60.125006 [arXiv:hep-th/9904191 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999
[22]

J. M. Maldacena, Phys. Rev. Lett.80, 4859-4862 (1998) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.80.4859 [arXiv:hep-th/9803002 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998
[23]

D. Correa, J. Henn, J. Maldacena and A. Sever, JHEP06(2012), 048 doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2012)048 [arXiv:1202.4455 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012
[24]

F. Castellani, L. Di Pietro, V. Forini and R. Stemplowski, [arXiv:2608.23697 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[25]

D. H. Correa, A. Faraggi, W. M ¨uck, L. A. Pando Zayas and G. A. Silva, JHEP10 (2023), 127 doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2023)127 [arXiv:2303.17635 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023
[26]

S. Giombi, S. Komatsu and B. Offertaler, JHEP03(2022), 020 doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2022)020 [arXiv:2110.13126 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022
[27]

S. Giombi, S. Komatsu and B. Offertaler, JHEP08(2022), 011 doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2022)011 [arXiv:2202.07627 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022
[28]

D. Bonomi, V. Forini, V. G. M. Puletti, L. Griguolo and D. Seminara, JHEP05(2026), 301 doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2026)301 [arXiv:2512.15698 [hep-th]]. 31

View on Pith arXiv 2026

Discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, highlight any passage above to comment on it, or challenge this review formally.

[1] [1]

S. Giombi, R. Roiban and A. A. Tseytlin, Nucl. Phys. B922(2017), 499-527 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2017.07.004 [arXiv:1706.00756 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2017

[2] [2]

N. Drukker and S. Kawamoto, JHEP07(2006), 024 doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2006/07/024

View on Pith doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2006/07/024 2006

[3] [3]

P. Liendo, C. Meneghelli and V. Mitev, JHEP10(2018), 077 doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2018)077 [arXiv:1806.01862 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018

[4] [4]

P. Ferrero and C. Meneghelli, Phys. Rev. D104(2021) no.8, L081703 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.L081703 [arXiv:2103.10440 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2021

[5] [5]

A. Cavagli` a, N. Gromov, J. Julius and M. Preti, Phys. Rev. D105(2022) no.2, L021902 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.L021902 [arXiv:2107.08510 [hep-th]]. 29

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022

[6] [6]

P. Ferrero and C. Meneghelli, JHEP05(2024), 090 doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2024)090 [arXiv:2312.12550 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024

[7] [7]

P. Ferrero and C. Meneghelli, JHEP06(2024), 010 doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2024)010 [arXiv:2312.12551 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024

[8] [8]

A. Cavagli` a, N. Gromov, J. Julius and M. Preti, JHEP05(2022), 164 doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2022)164 [arXiv:2203.09556 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022

[9] [9]

A. Cavagli` a, N. Gromov, J. Julius and M. Preti, JHEP04(2023), 026 doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2023)026 [arXiv:2211.03203 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023

[10] [10]

N. Drukker, JHEP10(2013), 135 doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2013)135 [arXiv:1203.1617 [hep- th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[11] [11]

D. Correa, J. Maldacena and A. Sever, JHEP08(2012), 134 doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2012)134 [arXiv:1203.1913 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012

[12] [12]

N. Gromov and F. Levkovich-Maslyuk, JHEP04(2016), 134 doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2016)134 [arXiv:1510.02098 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2016

[13] [13]

D. Correa, J. Henn, J. Maldacena and A. Sever, JHEP05(2012), 098 doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2012)098 [arXiv:1203.1019 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012

[14] [14]

M. Kim, N. Kiryu, S. Komatsu and T. Nishimura, JHEP12(2017), 055 doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2017)055 [arXiv:1710.07325 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2017

[15] [15]

A. Cavagli` a, N. Gromov and F. Levkovich-Maslyuk, JHEP10(2018), 060 doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2018)060 [arXiv:1802.04237 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018

[16] [16]

L. Bianchi, A. Cavagli` a, A. D. Guti´ errez, S. R. Kousvos and M. Meineri, [arXiv:2609.04035 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[17] [17]

R. A. Lanzetta, I. Moult and Y. Wang, [arXiv:2609.04041 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[18] [18]

R. A. Lanzetta, I. Moult and Y. Wang, [arXiv:2609.04302 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[19] [19]

N. Drukker, S. Giombi, R. Ricci and D. Trancanelli, JHEP05(2008), 017 doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/05/017 [arXiv:0711.3226 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2008

[20] [20]

N. Drukker and V. Forini, JHEP06(2011), 131 doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2011)131 [arXiv:1105.5144 [hep-th]]. 30

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2011

[21] [21]

N. Drukker, D. J. Gross and H. Ooguri, Phys. Rev. D60(1999), 125006 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.60.125006 [arXiv:hep-th/9904191 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999

[22] [22]

J. M. Maldacena, Phys. Rev. Lett.80, 4859-4862 (1998) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.80.4859 [arXiv:hep-th/9803002 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998

[23] [23]

D. Correa, J. Henn, J. Maldacena and A. Sever, JHEP06(2012), 048 doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2012)048 [arXiv:1202.4455 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012

[24] [24]

F. Castellani, L. Di Pietro, V. Forini and R. Stemplowski, [arXiv:2608.23697 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[25] [25]

D. H. Correa, A. Faraggi, W. M ¨uck, L. A. Pando Zayas and G. A. Silva, JHEP10 (2023), 127 doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2023)127 [arXiv:2303.17635 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023

[26] [26]

S. Giombi, S. Komatsu and B. Offertaler, JHEP03(2022), 020 doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2022)020 [arXiv:2110.13126 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022

[27] [27]

S. Giombi, S. Komatsu and B. Offertaler, JHEP08(2022), 011 doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2022)011 [arXiv:2202.07627 [hep-th]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022

[28] [28]

D. Bonomi, V. Forini, V. G. M. Puletti, L. Griguolo and D. Seminara, JHEP05(2026), 301 doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2026)301 [arXiv:2512.15698 [hep-th]]. 31

View on Pith arXiv 2026