Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 7 minor 1 cited by

Nonperturbative effects in $T\bar{T}$-deformed conformal field theories: A toy model for Planckian physics

T0 review · 4 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Nonperturbative resummation of the leading-logarithmic two-point function makes $T\bar{T}$-deformed CFT correlators oscillate below the Planck scale and then suppresses them with logarithmic factors at still shorter distances.

desk verdict A clean Borel summation of the leading-log T-Tbar correlator with a speculative Planckian reading; the short-distance claims rest on an input from the authors' companion paper and are not yet established beyond leading-log order. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.16262 v2 pith:AOJHIDYG submitted 2025-07-22 hep-th gr-qc

Shinji Hirano , Vinayak Raj This is my paper
classification hep-thgr-qc MSC 81T4081T1083C45
keywords T\bar{T}deformationnonperturbativecompletiontwo-pointcorrelatorPlanckscalequantumgravitytoymodelBorelresummationgeometricrandomnessentanglemententropy
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 proposes a nonperturbative completion of two-point correlators in $T\bar{T}$-deformed conformal field theories and uses it to probe correlations at distances shorter than the deformation length, which the authors identify as a Planck length. The central claim is that, after resummation, correlations no longer grow like powers of distance as in an ordinary CFT: they first oscillate at trans-Planckian separations and then become suppressed by geometric randomness at super-Planckian separations, with an effectively logarithmic distance scale. The paper also shows that entanglement entropy receives corrections only from the nonperturbative instanton-like sector, not from the perturbative series, and that for positive coupling a minimal-length signature appears at the Planck scale.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the momentum-space integral (3.1), whose exponent contains $\mu |k|^2\ln(|x_{12}|/\varepsilon)$ from the leading-log resummation; shifting and rescaling the momentum turns it into a Gaussian integral whose remaining factor is a Kummer or Tricomi hypergeometric function. The combination $Z$ parametrizes the distance scales, and its sign decides which nonperturbative branch applies. The same integral form is used with a logarithmic kernel for integer conformal dimensions, and the twist-operator limit $\Delta\to0$ converts the two-point function into entanglement entropy.

What would settle it

Compute the two-point correlator numerically from the massive-gravity path integral (2.2) for $|x_{12}|\ll\ell_P$ and compare with Eq. (4.3): seeing a different power or a different logarithmic factor would falsify the completion. A second check is to calculate the next-to-leading-log contribution and see whether it changes the super-Planckian behavior; if the leading-log result is not the leading term, the claimed regime does not exist.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the leading-logarithmic two-point correlator of a dimension-$\Delta$ operator in a $T\bar{T}$-deformed CFT has a nonperturbative completion given by Eq. (3.18): Kummer's function with an explicit $e^{-1/Z}$ instanton-like term for $Z>0$ and Tricomi's function for $Z<0$, where $Z = -\mathrm{sgn}(\mu)\,4\ell_P^2\ln(|x_{12}|/\ell_P)/(\pi |x_{12}|^2)$. In the super-Planckian regime $|x_{12}|\ll\ell_P$ this completion behaves as Eq. (4.3): for $\mu>0$ the correlator falls like $[\ln(\ell_P/|x_{12}|)]^{-\Delta}$, while for $\mu<0$ it grows only like $[\ln(\ell_P/|x_{12}|)]^{\Delta-1}$ (or, for integer $\Delta$ with $\mu>0$, with an additional $\ln\ln$ factor). The paper reads the resulting behavior as an effective replacement of the squared distance $|x_{12}|^2$ by $\ell_P^2\ln(\ell_P/|x_{12}|)$, meaning the underlying geometry is largely erased at short distances.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the leading-log two-point expression from the companion paper (Eq. (3.1)) is the correct nonperturbative starting point; if it is incomplete below the deformation scale, every claimed oscillation, suppression, and effective-distance replacement collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the completion is correct, the two-point correlator is defined at all distance scales, with no divergence stronger than logarithmic at $|x_{12}|\to0$, instead of the CFT power-law divergence.
  • At trans-Planckian separations the correlator oscillates; the frequency increases with $\Delta$, so heavier operators probe the geometry more violently.
  • For $\mu>0$, entanglement entropy of an interval dips to a minimum at $\ell_P$ and then rises mildly at shorter lengths, so $\ell_P$ acts as a physical minimal length.
  • For $\mu<0$, the super-Planckian entanglement entropy stays nearly CFT-like despite the correlator's nonperturbative corrections, a puzzle the paper explicitly leaves open.

Reading between the lines

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

  • One testable extension is to include subleading-logarithmic and finite-coupling effects: if the effective-distance replacement $\ell_P^2\ln(\ell_P/|x|)$ persists beyond leading-log order, it becomes a robust prediction about quantum spacetime rather than an artifact of the approximation.
  • If the geometric-randomness mechanism is universal, analogous logarithmic-distance behavior could appear in other quantum-gravity settings, including higher-dimensional models; the paper suggests this link but does not establish it.
  • The instanton-like sector is the sole source of entanglement corrections at leading-log order, so a fuller resurgent analysis of the partition function could reveal whether the $e^{-1/Z}$ term connects to known nonperturbative effects in the $T\bar{T}$ partition function.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 7 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a nonperturbative completion of the two-point correlator of a primary operator of dimension Δ in a T‾T-deformed CFT. Starting from the leading-log expression (3.1) taken from the authors' companion paper [19], the authors Borel-sum the divergent perturbative series for Z<0 and evaluate the momentum integral directly for Z>0, obtaining closed forms in terms of Tricomi and Kummer hypergeometric functions (3.18), with a separate treatment for integer Δ. They identify the reference scale with the Planck length ℓ_P = √|μ| and analyze the short-distance regime |x12| ≪ ℓ_P: for μ>0 the correlator shows trans-Planckian oscillations followed by suppression as inverse powers of ln(ℓ_P/|x12|), and the authors interpret this as an effective-distance replacement |x12| → ℓ_P^2 ln(ℓ_P/|x12|). They then compute the entanglement entropy from the twist-operator two-point function and find a minimum at the Planck scale for μ>0 and no nonperturbative correction for μ<0.

Significance. The paper gives an explicit, parameter-free example of how a T‾T-deformed CFT correlator can be resummed into a function with nontrivial short-distance behavior, including oscillations and logarithmic suppression. The closed forms (3.5), (3.13), (3.16) and the matching at Z=0 are concrete and checkable; the entanglement-entropy analysis in Section 5 is a natural extension. If Eq (3.1) is indeed the correct nonperturbative two-point function (or an exact leading term), the results support the interpretation of the T‾T deformation as quantum gravity in two dimensions and suggest universal features expected of quantum spacetime. The main weakness is that the central input is a leading-log expression from a companion paper, and the paper itself concedes that subleading corrections may change the picture; the strength of the conclusions therefore currently exceeds what is established.

major comments (4)
  1. [§3, Eq. (3.1)] The construction rests entirely on the leading-log expression (3.1), quoted from the authors' companion paper [19]. The paper explicitly says 'Restricting our attention to the leading logarithmic corrections' and Section 5 states 'our analysis is restricted to the leading logarithmic contribution, and subleading corrections might alter the overall picture.' Nevertheless, the abstract and Section 3 claim a 'nonperturbative completion' and 'exact expressions valid across all distance scales.' In the regime where the central predictions are made, |x12| ≪ ℓ_P, the variable Z is large (|Z| ∼ (ℓ_P/|x12|)^2 ln(ℓ_P/|x12|)), so the leading-log approximation is not controlled by a small parameter. No estimate is given for the size of subleading logarithmic or non-logarithmic terms. If Eq (3.1) receives subleading corrections, the super-Planckian suppression and the effective-distance replacement (4.5) can change qualitatively. This is the load-bearing point of the paper and needs either a derivation of (3.1) within the present manuscript, or an error bound showing the leading-log term dominates at |x12| ≪ ℓ_P, or a significant qualification of the claims.
  2. [§4, Eq. (4.3)] The asymptotic formulas in (4.3) appear to contain numerical errors. For μ>0, substituting Z = 4ℓ_P^2 ln(ℓ_P/|x12|)/(π|x12|^2) into (3.13) and using 1F1(1−Δ;1;1/Z) → 1 gives ⟨...⟩ ∼ Γ(1−Δ)(π/(4ℓ_P^2 ln(ℓ_P/|x12|)))^Δ, whereas (4.3) omits the factor π^Δ. For μ<0, using (−Z)^{−Δ}U(Δ,1,−1/Z) with U(Δ,1,z) ∼ −(ln z + ψ(Δ)+2γ)/Γ(Δ) gives a leading factor 2 ln(ℓ_P/|x12|) relative to the expression in (4.3); the factor 2 is missing. These discrepancies should be corrected, since (4.3) is the quantitative basis for the effective-distance claim (4.5).
  3. [§3, Eq. (3.17)] The matching expansion (3.17) states ⟨...⟩ ≃ |x12|^{−2Δ}(1 + 4Δ^2 Z + ...), but the perturbative series (3.2) and the trans-series (3.14) give the coefficient Δ^2, not 4Δ^2 (the n=1 term is Δ^2 Z/|x12|^{2Δ}). The factor 4 should be removed or explained. The matching argument itself is unaffected, since both regimes share the same first correction, but the stated coefficient is inconsistent with the paper's own equations.
  4. [§5, Eqs. (5.1)-(5.6)] The entanglement entropy result inherits the leading-log limitation of Eq (3.1). The claim that the Planck scale represents a minimal length, based on the minimum of S_EE at |x12| = ℓ_P, is not robust until the input (3.1) is validated at subleading order; the caveat in Section 5 applies directly to this conclusion. Additionally, the derivation of (5.6) relies on the asymptotic form (4.3), whose coefficients need the corrections noted above; after those corrections (5.6) may still be valid because the ln(4/π) term in (5.6) matches the ln Z contribution, but this should be rechecked explicitly.
minor comments (7)
  1. [§4] The term 'super-Planckian regime' is used for |x12| ≪ ℓ_P; this is a length scale below the Planck length, and the terminology may confuse readers accustomed to 'super-Planckian' meaning energies above the Planck scale. Please define the usage explicitly.
  2. [§3] For Z<0, the integral representation (3.1) is not convergent (the Gaussian factor grows if μ ln(|x12|/ε)>0); the paper should state that the Borel sum (3.5), rather than the integral, defines the correlator in that regime.
  3. [§3, Eq. (3.7)] The shift ⃗q = |x12|(⃗k−⃗a) and the definition of ⃗a contain signs that should be double-checked; the subsequent Gaussian integration and the cancellation of the prefactor π 2^{2Δ} are not shown in detail, making the final formula (3.13) hard to verify.
  4. [General] The manuscript has several rendering artifacts (e.g., 'T ¯T', 'ℓP = p|µ|', 'Schr¨ odinger'); these should be cleaned up.
  5. [References] Reference [19] is a companion paper by the same authors; please state its publication status and briefly summarize the derivation of Eq (3.1) so that the present paper is self-contained.
  6. [§5, Eq. (5.1)] Equation (5.1) introduces a UV regulator ϵ distinct from ε; the notation is easy to confuse, and the text should emphasize the difference.
  7. [Figures] Figure captions describe curves that are not shown in the text; ensure the figures are included and that the 'dashed orange curve' is visible in the final version.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The super-Planckian suppression and the effective-distance replacement (4.5) are consequences of the leading-log kernel (3.1), taken verbatim from the same authors' companion paper [19]; the perturbative match to [20-22] does not fix the nonperturbative kernel, so the central short-distance claim is load-bearing on that self-citation.

  1. self citation load bearing [Section 3, Eq. (3.1); propagated through Eqs. (3.18), (4.3), and (4.5)]
    "Restricting our attention to the leading logarithmic corrections, we begin with the expression derived in [19], obtained by integrating out the dynamical zweibein e^i_a within the massive gravity formulation of T-bar-T-deformed theories: <O_Delta(x1)O_Delta(x2)>^{leading-log}_{T-bar-T} = ... (3.1)"

    The paper's entire nonperturbative construction starts from Eq. (3.1), explicitly cited to [19], which is the same authors' companion paper. All later results, including the claimed super-Planckian suppression (4.3) and the effective-distance replacement (4.5), are obtained by evaluating or asymptotically expanding this input. The only independent check offered is that expanding (3.1) in powers of the T-bar-T coupling reproduces the known all-order perturbative series (3.2) from [20-22]. That check constrains the small-Z Taylor coefficients of the kernel, but not the nonperturbative completion at large |Z|, which is precisely the regime used for the super-Planckian claims.

full rationale

The derivation chain is: Eq. (3.1) is quoted from the same authors' companion paper [19]; its perturbative expansion (3.2) matches independent all-order leading-log results [20-22]; the paper then performs a Borel/resurgence resummation and direct integral evaluation to obtain closed forms (3.13)-(3.18); the short-distance asymptotics (4.3) and the interpretation (4.5) follow by expanding those forms. No data are fitted, no parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no external uniqueness theorem is invoked to forbid alternatives. The central nonperturbative result is therefore not circular by construction. However, the load-bearing input (3.1) is itself a self-citation: the only in-paper verification of that input is its perturbative expansion, which does not determine the large-|Z| behavior where the super-Planckian claims live. The claimed geometric erasure and logarithmic effective distance are thus properties of the companion-paper kernel, not consequences independently established in this paper. The authors' own caveat that 'our analysis is restricted to the leading logarithmic contribution, and subleading corrections might alter the overall picture' is an explicit acknowledgment of this limitation, but it is a correctness/robustness concern rather than a definitional circle. Given the independent perturbative benchmark and the absence of fitted predictions, the score is moderate, 4/10, rather than higher.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No constants are fitted to data; mu is the T-bar-T coupling and Delta is the operator dimension. The assumptions that carry the argument are the leading-log input (from the authors' companion paper), the massive-gravity dictionary, Borel summation as the completion, and the identification epsilon = sqrt(|mu|).

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The leading-log two-point correlator in the massive-gravity formulation is given by Eq (3.1).
    This is the starting point, quoted from the same authors' companion paper [19]; the present paper does not derive it.
  • domain assumption The T-bar-T deformation is equivalent to coupling to 2D massive gravity with the Tolley action (2.1).
    Adopted from Tolley [8]; the quantum-gravity interpretation of the whole paper hangs on this dictionary.
  • standard math Borel summation and analytic continuation of the formal series define the physical correlator.
    Implicit in constructing Eq (3.18); the Z greater than 0 branch is fixed by direct evaluation of a momentum integral rather than by a proven uniqueness theorem.
  • domain assumption The reference scale epsilon equals the Planck length sqrt(|mu|).
    Eq (4.1); this identification converts ordinary short-distance behavior into trans-Planckian and super-Planckian language.
  • domain assumption Leading logarithmic order is sufficient for the qualitative short-distance behavior.
    Restriction stated at the start of Section 3; Section 5 notes that subleading corrections might alter the entanglement entropy picture.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Nonperturbative effects in $T\bar{T}$-deformed conformal field theories: A toy model for Planckian physics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AOJHIDYG

@misc{pith2026250716262,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Nonperturbative effects in $T\barT$-deformed conformal field theories: A toy model for Planckian physics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AOJHIDYG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.16262}
}
abstract

We propose a nonperturbative completion of two-point correlators in $T\bar{T}$-deformed conformal field theories (CFTs), and analyze their behavior at distance scales shorter than the fundamental length scale set by the $T\bar{T}$ deformation. Building on the interpretation of the $T\bar{T}$ deformation as a coupling to two-dimensional quantum gravity with a unique built-in length scale, we advance the study of $T\bar{T}$-deformed CFTs as a toy model for Planckian physics. As we probe shorter distances, trans-Planckian oscillations are followed by a super-Planckian regime in which correlations are typically suppressed by geometric randomness, in contrast to the power-law growth characteristic of CFTs. Moreover, their dependence on distance becomes exponentially weaker, suggesting that the underlying geometric structure has been largely erased -- a behavior broadly consistent with expectations for quantum spacetime in this regime.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.16262 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Behavior of the two-point correlator (with ∆ = 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Behavior of the two-point correlator with ∆ = 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Behavior of the two-point correlator with low conformal dimension (∆ = 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Entanglement entropy (blue curve) for the interval between [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Entanglement entropy (blue curve) for the interval between [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. $T\bar{T}$-deformed correlators from a 2D gravity description

    hep-th 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Using a massive gravity formulation, the paper derives all-order leading-logarithmic T-bar-T corrections to two- and three-point CFT correlators, reproducing the known two-point result and obtaining a new closed form ...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

33 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [19]

    T ¯T -deformed correlators from a 2D gravity description,

    S. Hirano and V. Raj, “ T ¯T -deformed correlators from a 2D gravity description,” [arXiv:2507.16256 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  2. [1]

    Critical Phenomena for Field Theorists,

    S. Weinberg, “Critical Phenomena for Field Theorists,” Understanding the Fundamen- tal Constituents of Matter. The Subnuclear Series, vol 14. Springer. pp. 1-52 (1978), doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-0931-4 1

    work page doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-0931-4 1978

  3. [2]

    Ultraviolet Divergences In Quantum Theories Of Gravitation,

    S. Weinberg, “Ultraviolet Divergences In Quantum Theories Of Gravitation,” General Relativity: An Einstein centenary survey. Cambridge University Press. pp. 790-831 (1980)

    work page 1980

  4. [3]

    Expectation value of composite field T anti-T in two-dimensional quantum field theory,

    A. B. Zamolodchikov, “Expectation value of composite field T anti-T in two-dimensional quantum field theory,” hep-th/0401146

    arXiv

  5. [4]

    On space of integrable quantum field theories,

    F. A. Smirnov and A. B. Zamolodchikov, “On space of integrable quantum field theories,” Nucl. Phys. B 915, 363 (2017) doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2016.12.014 [arXiv:1608.05499 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2017

  6. [5]

    T ¯T -deformed 2D Quantum Field Theories,

    A. Cavagli` a, S. Negro, I. M. Sz´ ecs´ enyi and R. Tateo, “T ¯T -deformed 2D Quantum Field Theories,” JHEP 1610, 112 (2016) doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2016)112 [arXiv:1608.05534 [hep-th]]. 13

    arXiv 2016

  7. [6]

    Asymptotic fragility, near AdS2 hologra- phy and T T ,

    S. Dubovsky, V. Gorbenko and M. Mirbabayi, “Asymptotic fragility, near AdS2 hologra- phy and T T ,” JHEP 1709, 136 (2017) doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2017)136 [arXiv:1706.06604 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2017

  8. [7]

    T T partition function from topological gravity,

    S. Dubovsky, V. Gorbenko and G. Hern´ andez-Chifflet, “ T T partition function from topological gravity,” JHEP 1809, 158 (2018) doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2018)158 [arXiv:1805.07386 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2018

Show all 33 references
  1. [8]

    T T deformations, massive gravity and non-critical strings,

    A. J. Tolley, “ T T deformations, massive gravity and non-critical strings,” JHEP 06, 050 (2020) doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2020)050 [arXiv:1911.06142 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Correlation functions in T T-deformed Conformal Field Theories,

    O. Aharony and N. Barel, “Correlation functions in T T-deformed Conformal Field Theories,” JHEP 08, 035 (2023) doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2023)035 [arXiv:2304.14091 [hep- th]]

    2023 arXiv

  3. [10]

    Correlation functions in T T-deformed theories on the torus,

    N. Barel, “Correlation functions in T T-deformed theories on the torus,” JHEP 11, 167 (2024) doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2024)167 [arXiv:2407.15090 [hep-th]]

    2024 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Correlation functions in the TsT /T T cor- respondence,

    W. Cui, H. Shu, W. Song and J. Wang, “Correlation functions in the TsT /T T cor- respondence,” JHEP 04, 017 (2024) doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2024)017 [arXiv:2304.04684 [hep-th]]

    2024 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Symmetries and operators in T ¯T deformed CFTs,

    L. Chen, Z. Du, K. Liu and W. Song, “Symmetries and operators in T ¯T deformed CFTs,” [arXiv:2507.08588 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  6. [13]

    Modular invariance and uniqueness of T ¯T deformed CFT,

    O. Aharony, S. Datta, A. Giveon, Y. Jiang and D. Kutasov, “Modular invariance and uniqueness of T ¯T deformed CFT,” JHEP 01, 086 (2019) doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2019)086 [arXiv:1808.02492 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  7. [14]

    Exact T T Deformation of Two-Dimensional Maxwell Theory,

    L. Griguolo, R. Panerai, J. Papalini and D. Seminara, “Exact T T Deformation of Two-Dimensional Maxwell Theory,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, no.22, 221601 (2022) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.221601 [arXiv:2203.09683 [hep-th]]

    2022 arXiv

  8. [15]

    Exact T T deforma- tion of two-dimensional Yang-Mills theory on the sphere,

    L. Griguolo, R. Panerai, J. Papalini and D. Seminara, “Exact T T deforma- tion of two-dimensional Yang-Mills theory on the sphere,” JHEP 10, 134 (2022) doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2022)134 [arXiv:2207.05095 [hep-th]]

    2022 arXiv

  9. [16]

    Resurgence of T ¯T -deformed Partition Function,

    J. Gu, Y. Jiang and H. Wang, “Resurgence of T ¯T -deformed Partition Function,” [arXiv:2410.19633 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  10. [17]

    Resurgent properties of T T -deformed conformal field theories,

    J. Gu, Y. Jiang and H. Wang, “Resurgent properties of T T -deformed conformal field theories,” [arXiv:2503.19350 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  11. [18]

    The T T deformation of quantum field theory as random geometry,

    J. Cardy, “The T T deformation of quantum field theory as random geometry,” JHEP 1810, 186 (2018) doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2018)186 [arXiv:1801.06895 [hep-th]]. 14

    2018 arXiv

  12. [20]

    T T deformation of correlation functions,

    J. Cardy, “ T T deformation of correlation functions,” arXiv:1907.03394 [hep-th]

    1907 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Conformal field theory on T T -deformed space and correlators from dynamical coordinate transformations,

    S. Hirano and M. Shigemori, “Conformal field theory on T T -deformed space and correlators from dynamical coordinate transformations,” JHEP 07, 190 (2024) doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2024)190 [arXiv:2402.08278 [hep-th]]

    2024 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Random boundary geometry and gravity dual of T T deformation,

    S. Hirano and M. Shigemori, “Random boundary geometry and gravity dual of T T deformation,” JHEP 11, 108 (2020) doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2020)108 [arXiv:2003.06300 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  15. [23]

    An introduction to resurgence in quantum theory,

    M. Mari˜ no, “An introduction to resurgence in quantum theory,” https://www.marcosmarino.net/uploads/1/3/3/5/133535336/resurgence-course.pdf

  16. [24]

    Entanglement entropy in T T -deformed CFT,

    B. Chen, L. Chen and P. X. Hao, “Entanglement entropy in T T -deformed CFT,” Phys. Rev. D 98, no.8, 086025 (2018) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.086025 [arXiv:1807.08293 [hep-th]]

    2018 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Correlation functions, entanglement and chaos in the T T /JT -deformed CFTs,

    S. He and H. Shu, “Correlation functions, entanglement and chaos in the T T /JT -deformed CFTs,” JHEP 02, 088 (2020) doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2020)088 [arXiv:1907.12603 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Note on higher-point correlation functions of the T ¯T or J ¯T deformed CFTs,

    S. He, “Note on higher-point correlation functions of the T ¯T or J ¯T deformed CFTs,” Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 64, no.9, 291011 (2021) doi:10.1007/s11433-021-1741-1 [arXiv:2012.06202 [hep-th]]

    2021 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Non-perturbative aspects of entanglement structures in T ¯T -deformed CFTs,

    W. X. Lai, H. Wang and Y. Xu, “Non-perturbative aspects of entanglement structures in T ¯T -deformed CFTs,” [arXiv:2507.15220 [hep-th]]

  20. [28]

    The Hagedorn Transition and the Number of Degrees of Freedom of String Theory,

    J. J. Atick and E. Witten, “The Hagedorn Transition and the Number of Degrees of Freedom of String Theory,” Nucl. Phys. B 310, 291-334 (1988) doi:10.1016/0550- 3213(88)90151-4

    1988 doi

  21. [29]

    Spectral dimension of the universe,

    J. Ambjorn, J. Jurkiewicz and R. Loll, “Spectral dimension of the universe,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 171301 (2005) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.171301 [arXiv:hep-th/0505113 [hep-th]]

    2005 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Fractal spacetime structure in asymptotically safe gravity,

    O. Lauscher and M. Reuter, “Fractal spacetime structure in asymptotically safe gravity,” JHEP 10, 050 (2005) doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2005/10/050 [arXiv:hep-th/0508202 [hep- th]]

    2005 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Fractal Structure of Loop Quantum Gravity,

    L. Modesto, “Fractal Structure of Loop Quantum Gravity,” Class. Quant. Grav. 26, 242002 (2009) doi:10.1088/0264-9381/26/24/242002 [arXiv:0812.2214 [gr-qc]]. 15

    2009 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Spectral Dimension of the Universe in Quantum Gravity at a Lifshitz Point,

    P. Horava, “Spectral Dimension of the Universe in Quantum Gravity at a Lifshitz Point,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 161301 (2009) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.161301 [arXiv:0902.3657 [hep-th]]

    2009 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Spontaneous Dimensional Reduction in Short-Distance Quantum Gravity?,

    S. Carlip, “Spontaneous Dimensional Reduction in Short-Distance Quantum Gravity?,” AIP Conf. Proc. 1196, no.1, 72 (2009) doi:10.1063/1.3284402 [arXiv:0909.3329 [gr-qc]]. 16

    2009 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.