Entanglement Entropy after Double-Excitation as Interaction Measure

Masamichi Miyaji; Yuya Kusuki

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 35 references

Entanglement Entropy after Double-Excitation as Interaction Measure

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A double local quench in a pure 2D CFT produces a negative interaction term in the entanglement entropy, so two excitations do not simply add.

desk verdict New exact-in-c interaction term for double local quenches; the physics is suggestive, but Eq. (23) needs a proof before the coefficient is trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.03351 v1 pith:5RK6M36V submitted 2019-08-09 hep-th

Yuya Kusuki , Masamichi Miyaji This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-th PACS 11.25.Hf03.67.Mn

keywords entanglemententropylocalquenchdoubleexcitationconformalfieldtheoryReggelimitblockmonodromymatrixinteractionmeasure

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper asks whether entanglement entropy can measure the interaction between two quantum excitations, not just their individual propagation. In a two-dimensional conformal field theory with central charge $c>1$ and no extra conserved currents (a 'pure' CFT), it computes the late-time entanglement entropy after two local operators act on the vacuum at positions $l_Al_B$. Because the correction is exact in $c$ and independent of the operators' conformal weights, the authors read it as the entanglement-side signature of the attractive gravitational force between the two particles in the holographic dual. This makes entanglement entropy a direct probe of interactions in strongly coupled systems.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the monodromy/fusion approach to multi-point conformal blocks in the cyclic orbifold CFT $\mathcal{M}^n/\mathbb{Z}_n$. The six-point correlator of Eq. (21) is decomposed into conformal blocks; the Regge limit picks out the twist-operator exchange and, through the monodromy matrix $M^{(n)}$, converts the correlator into a product of two single-excitation residues (one for $O_A$, one for $O_B$) times a leftover six-point block. The crucial step is Eq. (23): in the $n\to1$ limit this leftover block is asserted to factor as $[z_1(z_2-z_1)]^{-2h_{\sigma_n}}$, which turns distances into the logarithms of Eq. (25). The same approach also yields the finite-interval and circle generalizations in Eqs. (26) and (27).

What would settle it

Numerically evaluate the six-point function in Eq. (21) for a specific pure CFT at finite replica number $n$ and take the $n\to1$ limit using available conformal-block numerics; if the leftover factor is not $[z_1(z_2-z_1)]^{-2h_{\sigma_n}}$, the predicted interaction term $\frac{c}{6}\log\frac{l_B-l_A}{t-l_A}$ would be modified. A simpler check is to measure the late-time slope of $\Delta S_A[O_A;O_B]$: Eq. (25) predicts a universal $\frac{c}{6}\log t$ growth, whereas the naive sum rule predicts twice that slope.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that the sum rule for entanglement entropy after multiple local excitations fails in pure CFTs, and the failure is governed by a universal interaction term. Working in the Regge limit (late time $t>l_B$, small regulator) and taking the replica limit $n\to 1$ of the six-point function, the authors obtain $$\$\Delta$ S_A[O_A;O_B]=\$\Delta$ S_A[O_A]+\$\Delta$ S_A[O_B]+\frac{c}{6}\log\frac{l_B-l_A}{t-l_A}.$$ The interaction term is negative, exact in the central charge, and independent of how heavy the operators are. Equivalently, at very late times the double-excitation entropy grows as $\frac{c}{6}\log t$, not as $2\times\frac{c}{6}\log t$. The authors interpret the negative term as the CFT dual of the attractive gravitational force between two particles, and they contrast this with RCFTs and free scalars, where the sum rule survives.

Load-bearing premise

The result stands on two unproved inputs: that the CFT is pure (no extra conserved currents), and that in the $n\to1$ replica limit the leftover six-point conformal block is exactly $[z_1(z_2-z_1)]^{-2h_{\sigma_n}}$ as stated in Eq. (23), a factorization inherited from the companion paper; if either fails, the interaction term in Eq. (25) would change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

In any pure CFT, the entanglement entropy after two local excitations is strictly smaller than the sum of the two single-excitation entropies, and the deficit grows logarithmically with the separation $l_B-l_A$ and with time.
At late times the double-excitation state behaves like a single effective excitation, with $\Delta S_A\sim \frac{c}{6}\log t$ rather than $2\times\frac{c}{6}\log t$, consistent with two particles merging gravitationally.
The interaction term is universal: it depends only on the central charge and the distances $l_A,l_B$, not on which operators are excited.
In rational CFTs and free massless scalars the sum rule survives, so the appearance of the negative interaction term is a sharp diagnostic for theories with a holographic (Einstein-gravity) dual.
The same method yields explicit generalizations for a finite interval and for a circle (Eqs. (26) and (27)), giving concrete predictions for how the interaction term depends on interval length and total circumference.

Reading between the lines

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

If Eq. (25) is correct, the same six-point block limit should control other entanglement probes in double-quench states, such as reflected entropy or negativity; computing those would test whether the interaction term is universal beyond the single-interval entropy.
Because the interaction term is independent of operator weights, one can test Eq. (25) numerically in a specific pure CFT without choosing particular operators—a mismatch would localize exactly which step in the derivation fails.
The gravitational interpretation could be sharpened by computing holographic entanglement entropy for two massive particles that fall without merging; the paper notes the merger geometry gives the right $\log t$ growth but not the constant terms, so a non-merging two-particle geometry is a concrete candidate for a quantitative match.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Dear colleague,

The paper's main result is a concrete prediction: for a double local operator excitation in a pure CFT (c>1, no chiral primaries), the entanglement entropy is the sum of the two single-excitation contributions plus (c/6) log((l_B-l_A)/(t-l_A)) in the late-time limit. That negative interaction term is new, exact in central charge, and independent of the operator dimensions. If it holds, it gives a clean separation between holographic CFTs and RCFTs, where a sum rule applies. The sign matches the intuitive picture that gravitational attraction slows entanglement growth, and the authors are explicit that this is their main result.

What the paper does well: the logic is straightforward, the stated restrictions (pure CFTs, vacuum exchange) are clear, and the generalization to an interval and to a circle (Eqs. 26, 27) are useful. The discussion of a possible gravity dual is honest—they note that a two-particle merger reproduces the late-time log t but not the constant terms, so the bulk interpretation is left open.

The soft spot is exactly where the stress-test lands. The decisive step is Eq. (23): after two Regge residues, the remaining six-point block is asserted to equal [z1(z2-z1)]^{-2h_{sigma_n}} in the n->1 limit, with no derivation and with z1,z2 never defined. Eq. (22) is imported from the authors' companion paper and not independently verified here. Since the coefficient c/6 in (25) comes from that exponent, the main formula rests on this unproved limit. I would not call it a fitted or assumed result—the derivation is a boundary computation, not an input—but it is a genuine gap in a short letter.

If I were refereeing, I would ask for a proof of (23) or an explicit pointer to the derivation in 1905.02191, plus definitions of z1,z2. A prefactor in (23) that goes to 1 at n=1 with nonvanishing derivative would only shift constant terms, so the qualitative log-time behavior is robust; the dangerous error is a different exponent, which would change the coefficient. I lean towards the formula being right, but I would not rely on it without checking that block limit.

This paper is for people working on local quenches, entanglement, and bulk-boundary signatures. It is a good reading group candidate because the gap is concrete and checkable. I would send it to peer review: a specialist can settle whether (23) is correct, and if it is, this is a publishable result.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the time evolution of entanglement entropy after a double local operator excitation in two-dimensional conformal field theories with central charge c > 1, restricted to 'pure' CFTs (no chiral primaries). The main claim is Eq. (25): in the late-time Regge limit t > l_B, the excitation contribution to the half-space entanglement entropy is not the sum of two independent single-excitation contributions but acquires an additional negative term, (c/6) log((l_B - l_A)/(t - l_A)). This term is independent of the operator weights and is exact in the central charge. The derivation is based on a six-point twist-field correlator, evaluated by taking repeated Regge-limit residues of the Virasoro conformal block, using the fusion/monodromy technology introduced in the companion paper arXiv:1905.02191. The paper further proposes a gravitational interpretation: the negative interaction term reflects the attractive force between two particles in AdS.

Significance. If the central result is correct, it is a valuable and surprising universal statement: entanglement entropy is claimed to detect interactions between local excitations in holographic CFTs in a way that is nonperturbative in the central charge and independent of the operator dimensions. This goes beyond the existing single-quench results and beyond the sum rule known for rational CFTs, and it provides a sharp, falsifiable prediction (a negative logarithmic correction) that could be checked by bootstrap or holographic methods. The paper also makes a concrete connection to gravitational attraction and to the classical black-hole merger entropy growth. The main caveat is that the decisive technical step, Eq. (23), is not derived in the paper but only imported from the authors' companion work; the strength of the claim therefore depends entirely on the reliability of that external result.

major comments (3)

[Section III] The central step of the derivation is the assertion that, after the two Regge-pole residues and in the limit n -> 1, the remaining six-point conformal block reduces to [z1 (z2 - z1)]^{-2 h_sigma_n}. This is the only source of the interaction term in Eq. (25), because the exponent -2 h_sigma_n, together with h_sigma_n ~ (c/12)(n-1), produces the coefficient c/6 after the 1/(1-n) prefactor. The manuscript gives no proof or derivation of this limit, and the cross ratios z1 and z2 are never defined. A prefactor f(n) with f(1)=1 but f'(1) != 0, or a power that differs from -2 h_sigma_n by any fixed shift, would change the interaction term. The authors should either provide a self-contained derivation (an appendix would be appropriate) or give an exact reference to the companion paper arXiv:1905.02191 with precise equation and theorem numbers, including the definitions of z1 and z2 and the channel in which the block is evaluated.
[Section III] The factorization of the six-point correlator into two Regge residues times a leftover conformal block is assumed without proof. This is not a trivial step: it requires the monodromy transformation of a six-point Virasoro block in the (Vir)^n / Z_n orbifold theory, and it must hold for all values of the central charge if the claim of c-exactness in Eq. (25) is to be substantiated. The paper states that this result follows from the methods of [1], but it does not specify which statement in [1] applies, what its regime of validity is, or whether subleading terms in the monodromy integral have been dropped. Since the interaction term is the whole new physics claimed, this factorization is load-bearing and needs a clear justification or an explicit pointer to a proof in the companion paper.
[Section III] The order of limits in the derivation is not made precise. The text says 'in the late time limit (i.e., the Regge limit)' and then 'epsilon -> 0 and n-1 -> 0', but it does not specify whether one first takes epsilon -> 0 and then n -> 1, or whether the limits commute. The exponent of (2i epsilon) in Eq. (24) and the appearance of the factor (l_B - l_A)/(t - l_A) could in principle receive corrections if the small-epsilon and small-(n-1) limits interact. The authors should state the exact order of limits and argue that higher-order terms vanish uniformly in n, especially because the final result is claimed to be exact in c and holds for t > l_B without other approximations.

minor comments (4)

[Section III] The symbols z1 and z2 are introduced in Eq. (23) without definition. Even if the companion paper is referenced, the present manuscript should at least define these cross ratios and indicate how they are related to the physical positions l_A, l_B, t, and epsilon.
[Section I] The definition of the double-excited state in Eq. (5) contains an apparent redundancy: the factor e^{epsilon H + i H t} e^{-epsilon H - i H t} equals the identity, so the operator O_A is inserted at the same time as O_B. This may be a typographical artifact, but it makes the state ambiguous; please rewrite the expression so that the intended time evolution of both operators is clear.
[Section III] The generalizations to a finite interval and to a circle are stated without derivation. Since they are plausible and can likely be obtained from the methods of [26], it would be helpful to outline the conformal-transformation argument that leads from Eq. (25) to Eqs. (26) and (27), even in a footnote.
[General] The phrase 'pure CFTs' is central to the validity of the result but is only defined in the introduction as CFTs with c > 1 and without chiral primaries. Since the conclusion that the dominant residue comes from alpha = 2 alpha_n is nontrivial, a brief explanation of why the vacuum contribution is absent in this class would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: Eq. (25) is derived from conformal-block limits, not assumed or fitted; unproved Eq. (23) is a soundness concern, not a circular one.

full rationale

The paper's central result, Eq. (25), is obtained by evaluating the six-point correlator (21) in the Regge limit via the factorization (22) and the n→1 conformal-block limit (23). Neither (22) nor (23) contains Eq. (25); they are statements about monodromy matrices and conformal blocks, not about double-excitation entanglement entropy. The interaction term (c/6) log((l_B−l_A)/(t−l_A)) follows by substituting the explicit cross ratios into the factor [z1(z2−z1)]^{−2h_{σ_n}} and taking the n→1 limit with h_{σ_n} = (c/24)(1−1/n^2). No parameter is fitted to the target quantity, and the single-excitation terms ΔS_A[O_A], ΔS_A[O_B] appear only after the limit, not as inputs. The reliance on the authors' companion paper arXiv:1905.02191 for the block technology is a standard use of prior results, and the introduction notes that the relevant analytic forms were checked numerically in Refs. [14,23]; this does not make the derivation circular because the cited results concern conformal blocks, not the double-excitation entanglement entropy. The incomplete proof of Eq. (23) and the undefined cross ratios z1,z2 are genuine correctness/completeness concerns, but they are not circularity: the target formula (25) is not assumed among the paper's inputs. Therefore no circular step is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central formula rests on the pure-CFT assumption, the monodromy or fusion-matrix technology from the authors' prior work, the pole-dominance selection in the Regge limit, and the asserted n -> 1 limit of the remaining conformal block. No numerical fitting is involved; the parameters c, h_O, l_A, and l_B are physical inputs rather than fitted free parameters.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Pure CFTs exist: unitary compact 2D CFTs with c > 1 and no chiral primaries, allowing vacuum-exchange dominance in the Regge limit.
The entire derivation in Section III is restricted to pure CFTs; the RCFT case gives a sum rule instead (Eqs. 30-31). The existence of such theories is a standard assumption in the holographic CFT program, not proven in this paper.
domain assumption The monodromy and fusion matrix method for multi-point conformal blocks from arXiv:1905.02191 correctly gives the Regge-limit residue structure of the six-point function.
Eq. (22) applies the monodromy transformation (13) to the six-point correlator and factorizes the result into two single-quench residues; this relies on the prior framework developed by the same authors.
ad hoc to paper In the n -> 1 limit, the remaining six-point conformal block equals [z1(z2 - z1)]^{-2 h_sigma_n}.
Stated after Eq. (23) with no derivation in this paper; the authors note it cannot be evaluated for general n. This limit is load-bearing for the final interaction term in Eq. (25).
domain assumption In pure CFTs, the integral over intermediate dimensions in the Regge limit is dominated by the minimal Liouville momentum alpha = 2 alpha_n.
Eqs. (14)-(17) review this dominance from prior work [1,14,24]; the double-excitation analog in Eq. (22) inherits it. For RCFTs, the vacuum alpha = 0 dominates and the sum rule holds.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Entanglement Entropy after Double-Excitation as Interaction Measure." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5RK6M36V

@misc{pith2026190803351,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Entanglement Entropy after Double-Excitation as Interaction Measure},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5RK6M36V}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.03351}
}

abstract

We study entanglement entropy after a double local quench in two-dimensional conformal field theories (CFTs), with any central charge $c>1$. In the holographic CFT, such a state with double-excitation is dual to an AdS space with two massive particles introduced from the boundary. We show that the growth after the double local excitations cannot be given by the sum of two local quenches but with an additional negative term. This negative contribution can be naturally interpreted as due to the attractive force of gravity. In CFT side, this evaluation of the entanglement entropy is accomplished by a special limit of 6-point functions, where we employed the fusion matrix approach for multi-point conformal blocks developed in arXiv:1905.02191.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.03351 by the authors.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references · 10 canonical work pages

[1]

Kusuki and M

Y . Kusuki and M. Miyaji,Entanglement Entropy, OTOC and Bootstrap in 2D CFTs from Regge and Light Cone Limits of Multi-point Conformal Block, 1905.02191

arXiv 1905
[2]

J. M. Maldacena, Large N ﬁeld theories, string theory and gravity, in Proceedings, NATO Advanced Study Institute on Progress in String Theory and M-Theory: Cargese, France, May 24-June 5, 1999, pp. 47–116, 1999

work page 1999
[3]

Collier, Y .-H

S. Collier, Y .-H. Lin and X. Yin,Modular bootstrap revisited, 1608.06241v1

arXiv
[4]

Collier, P

S. Collier, P. Kravchuk, Y .-H. Lin and X. Yin,Bootstrapping the Spectral Function: On the Uniqueness of Liouville and the Universality of BTZ, 1702.00423

arXiv
[5]

Ryu and T

S. Ryu and T. Takayanagi, Aspects of holographic entanglement entropy, Journal of High Energy Physics 2006 (2006) 045

work page 2006
[6]

V . E. Hubeny, M. Rangamani and T. Takayanagi,A Covariant holographic entanglement entropy proposal, JHEP 07 (2007) 062 [0705.0016]

arXiv 2007
[7]

Notes on Quantum Entanglement of Local Operators

M. Nozaki, Notes on Quantum Entanglement of Local Operators, JHEP 10 (2014) 147 [1405.5875]

work page Pith review arXiv 2014
[8]

Nozaki, T

M. Nozaki, T. Numasawa and T. Takayanagi, Quantum Entanglement of Local Operators in Conformal Field Theories, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112 (2014) 111602 [1401.0539]

arXiv 2014

Show all 35 references

[9]

S. He, T. Numasawa, T. Takayanagi and K. Watanabe, Quantum dimension as entanglement entropy in two dimensional conformal ﬁeld theories, Phys. Rev. D90 (2014) 041701 [1403.0702]

2014 arXiv
[10]

Numasawa, Scattering eﬀect on entanglement propagation in rcfts, 1610.06181v2

T. Numasawa, Scattering eﬀect on entanglement propagation in rcfts, 1610.06181v2

arXiv
[11]

Caputa, M

P. Caputa, M. Nozaki and T. Takayanagi, Entanglement of local operators in large n cfts, 1405.5946v2

arXiv
[12]

C. T. Asplund, A. Bernamonti, F. Galli and T. Hartman, Holographic Entanglement Entropy from 2d CFT: Heavy States and Local Quenches, JHEP 02 (2015) 171 [1410.1392]

2015 arXiv
[13]

Kusuki,Light Cone Bootstrap in General 2D CFTs and Entanglement from Light Cone Singularity, 1810.01335

Y . Kusuki,Light Cone Bootstrap in General 2D CFTs and Entanglement from Light Cone Singularity, 1810.01335

arXiv
[14]

Kusuki and T

Y . Kusuki and T. Takayanagi,Renyi entropy for local quenches in 2D CFT from numerical conformal blocks, JHEP 01 (2018) 115 [1711.09913]

2018 arXiv
[15]

J. R. David, S. Khetrapal and S. P. Kumar, Universal corrections to entanglement entropy of local quantum quenches, JHEP 08 (2016) 127 [1605.05987]

2016 arXiv
[16]

Caputa, Y

P. Caputa, Y . Kusuki, T. Takayanagi and K. Watanabe, Evolution of Entanglement Entropy in Orbifold CFTs, J. Phys. A50 (2017) 244001 [1701.03110]

2017 arXiv
[17]

He, Conformal Bootstrap to R´ enyi Entropy in 2D Liouville and Super-Liouville CFTs, 1711.00624

S. He, Conformal Bootstrap to R´ enyi Entropy in 2D Liouville and Super-Liouville CFTs, 1711.00624

arXiv
[18]

W.-z. Guo, S. He and Z.-X. Luo, Entanglement entropy in (1+1)D CFTs with multiple local excitations, 1802.08815

arXiv
[19]

Shimaji, T

T. Shimaji, T. Takayanagi and Z. Wei, Holographic Quantum Circuits from Splitting/Joining Local Quenches, 1812.01176

arXiv
[20]

Apolo, S

L. Apolo, S. He, W. Song, J. Xu and J. Zheng, Entanglement and chaos in warped conformal ﬁeld theories, 1812.10456

arXiv
[21]

C. T. Asplund, A. Bernamonti, F. Galli and T. Hartman, Entanglement Scrambling in 2d Conformal Field Theory, JHEP 09 (2015) 110 [1506.03772]

2015 arXiv
[22]

Caputa and M

P. Caputa and M. M. Rams, Quantum dimensions from local operator excitations in the ising model, 1609.02428v2

arXiv
[23]

Kusuki,New Properties of Large-c Conformal Blocks from Recursion Relation, 1804.06171

Y . Kusuki,New Properties of Large-c Conformal Blocks from Recursion Relation, 1804.06171

arXiv
[24]

Kusuki,Large c Virasoro Blocks from Monodromy Method beyond Known Limits, 1806.04352

Y . Kusuki,Large c Virasoro Blocks from Monodromy Method beyond Known Limits, 1806.04352

arXiv
[25]

Collier, Y

S. Collier, Y . Gobeil, H. Maxﬁeld and E. Perlmutter,Quantum Regge Trajectories and the Virasoro Analytic Bootstrap, 1811.05710

arXiv
[26]

Calabrese and J

P. Calabrese and J. Cardy, Entanglement entropy and quantum ﬁeld theory, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2004 (2004) P06002

2004
[27]

Caputa, T

P. Caputa, T. Numasawa, T. Shimaji, T. Takayanagi and Z. Wei, Double Local Quenches in 2D CFTs and Gravitational Force, 1905.08265

1905 arXiv
[28]

Matschull, Black hole creation in (2+1)-dimensions, Class

H.-J. Matschull, Black hole creation in (2+1)-dimensions, Class. Quant. Grav. 16 (1999) 1069

1999
[29]

D. S. Ageev and I. Ya. Aref’eva, Holographic instant conformal symmetry breaking by colliding conical defects, Theor. Math. Phys. 189 (2016) 1742 [1512.03363]

2016 arXiv
[30]

I. Ya. Aref’eva, M. A. Khramtsov and M. D. Tikhanovskaya, Thermalization after holographic bilocal quench, JHEP 09 (2017) 115 [1706.07390]

2017 arXiv
[31]

Dutta and T

S. Dutta and T. Faulkner, A canonical puriﬁcation for the entanglement wedge cross-section, 1905.00577

1905 arXiv
[32]

Kusuki and K

Y . Kusuki and K. Tamaoka,Dynamics of Entanglement Wedge Cross Section from Conformal Field Theories, 1907.06646

1907 arXiv
[33]

Kudler-Flam and S

J. Kudler-Flam and S. Ryu, Entanglement negativity and minimal entanglement wedge cross sections in holographic theories, Phys. Rev. D99 (2019) 106014 [1808.00446]

2019 arXiv
[34]

Kusuki, J

Y . Kusuki, J. Kudler-Flam and S. Ryu,Derivation of holographic negativity in AdS3/CFT2, 1907.07824

1907 arXiv
[35]

Tamaoka, Entanglement Wedge Cross Section from the Dual Density Matrix, Phys

K. Tamaoka, Entanglement Wedge Cross Section from the Dual Density Matrix, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (2019) 141601 [1809.09109]

2019 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Kusuki and M

Y . Kusuki and M. Miyaji,Entanglement Entropy, OTOC and Bootstrap in 2D CFTs from Regge and Light Cone Limits of Multi-point Conformal Block, 1905.02191

arXiv 1905

[2] [2]

J. M. Maldacena, Large N ﬁeld theories, string theory and gravity, in Proceedings, NATO Advanced Study Institute on Progress in String Theory and M-Theory: Cargese, France, May 24-June 5, 1999, pp. 47–116, 1999

work page 1999

[3] [3]

Collier, Y .-H

S. Collier, Y .-H. Lin and X. Yin,Modular bootstrap revisited, 1608.06241v1

arXiv

[4] [4]

Collier, P

S. Collier, P. Kravchuk, Y .-H. Lin and X. Yin,Bootstrapping the Spectral Function: On the Uniqueness of Liouville and the Universality of BTZ, 1702.00423

arXiv

[5] [5]

Ryu and T

S. Ryu and T. Takayanagi, Aspects of holographic entanglement entropy, Journal of High Energy Physics 2006 (2006) 045

work page 2006

[6] [6]

V . E. Hubeny, M. Rangamani and T. Takayanagi,A Covariant holographic entanglement entropy proposal, JHEP 07 (2007) 062 [0705.0016]

arXiv 2007

[7] [7]

Notes on Quantum Entanglement of Local Operators

M. Nozaki, Notes on Quantum Entanglement of Local Operators, JHEP 10 (2014) 147 [1405.5875]

work page Pith review arXiv 2014

[8] [8]

Nozaki, T

M. Nozaki, T. Numasawa and T. Takayanagi, Quantum Entanglement of Local Operators in Conformal Field Theories, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112 (2014) 111602 [1401.0539]

arXiv 2014