Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 4 cited by

Conformal 3-point functions and the Lorentzian OPE in momentum space

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Pith's one-line read This paper establishes that momentum-space Wightman 3-point functions in conformal field theory are Appell F4 double hypergeometric series, with the physical solution and normalization selected by the Lorentzian operator product expansion.

desk verdict The scalar Wightman 3-point function is a genuinely useful closed-form result; the spin and time-ordered extensions are plausible but less complete. read the letter →

arxiv 1909.00878 v3 pith:BL5AETGX submitted 2019-09-02 hep-th

classification hep-th MSC 81T4033C65
keywords conformalfieldtheorymomentumspaceWightmanfunctionsAppellF4operatorproductexpansionWardidentitieshypergeometrictracelesssymmetrictensor
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's claim is that, in any conformal field theory in Minkowski space, the Wightman 3-point function of scalar operators is an Appell $F_4$ double hypergeometric series (up to an OPE coefficient and explicit momentum-space power laws), not an unwieldy integral over Bessel functions. The argument uses conformal Ward identities to turn the correlator into a system of partial differential equations whose four solutions are Appell $F_4$ functions, and uses the Lorentzian operator product expansion to pick the physical solution and fix its coefficient. The same closed form extends to two scalars and one traceless symmetric tensor of arbitrary spin. Time-ordered and partially time-ordered products are constructed from the same solution space and related to the Wightman function. A reader should care because the result turns a hard numerical integral into a convergent series and makes Lorentzian momentum-space CFT correlators directly computable.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the momentum-space OPE coefficient $\widetilde C_{12O}(p,q)$, the formal Fourier transform of the position-space OPE coefficient, which is analytic in $q$ around $q=0$ and thereby turns OPE limits into boundary conditions. The conformal Ward identities for special conformal transformations become a pair of second-order partial differential equations in the two variables $z_f=p_f^2/p_0^2$ and $z_i=p_i^2/p_0^2$; their general solution is a linear combination of four Appell $F_4$ functions. Appell's $F_4$ is the double hypergeometric series $\sum_{n,m}\frac{(a)_{n+m}(b)_{n+m}}{n!m!(c_f)_n(c_i)_m}z_f^n z_i^m$. The OPE boundary conditions select exactly one of the four solutions in the scalar case (and in the spin-$\ell$ case via a recursion), and the transformation formula (38) analytically continues the selected solution past the light cone $p_0^2=0$.

What would settle it

Evaluate the direct Fourier transform of the position-space Wightman 3-point function (the integral in appendix B) at a generic configuration with time-like $p_0$ and compare it with eq. (47); any mismatch in the branch cut at $p_0^2=0$ or in the coefficient relation (44) would refute the central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The discovery is that the Lorentzian OPE supplies a boundary condition that fixes the solution of the conformal Ward identities: among the four Appell $F_4$ solutions, only one respects the light-cone and zero-momentum OPE limits. For three scalars the Wightman function is therefore $$\langle\!\langle\phi_f(p_f)\phi_0(p_0)\phi_i(p_i)\rangle\!\rangle = \tilde\lambda_{f0i}\,\Theta(-p_f)\Theta(p_i)\,\frac{(-$p_f^{2}$)^{\Delta_f-d/2}(-$p_i^{2}$)^{\Delta_i-d/2}}{($p_0^{2}$)^{(\Delta_i+\Delta_f-\Delta_0)/2}}\, F_{\Delta_f\Delta_0\Delta_i}\left(\frac{$p_f^{2}$}{$p_0^{2}$},\frac{$p_i^{2}$}{$p_0^{2}$}\right),$$ valid in the region where the $F_4$ series converges, with eq. (47) covering all kinematic regions by analytic continuation. For two scalars and one traceless symmetric tensor of spin $\ell$, the same Appell structure survives: a recursion in the polarization vector determines all tensor structures from one $F_4$, and the coefficient is fixed by matching the position-space OPE. The paper further shows that partially time-ordered and fully time-ordered correlators are the other solutions of the same differential system with different boundary conditions, and that in fully spacelike kinematics the time-ordered function reproduces the known Euclidean expression.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that the Fourier-transformed OPE coefficient is analytic in the total momentum $q$ near $q=0$, so the zero-momentum and light-cone limits select a single solution with no correction series; if that analyticity fails, the Appell $F_4$ form and its normalization no longer follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any scalar 3-point Wightman function in a Lorentzian CFT, in any $d\ge 2$ and any scaling dimensions above the unitarity bound, can be evaluated as a convergent double hypergeometric series instead of a numerical Bessel integral.
  • The same closed form covers two scalars plus one traceless symmetric tensor of arbitrary spin, bringing conserved currents and the stress tensor within reach.
  • Time-ordered correlators are the remaining solutions of the same differential system; in fully spacelike kinematics the fully time-ordered function coincides with the known Euclidean expression.
  • At double-trace dimensions the hypergeometric series terminates and the 3-point function factorizes into products of 2-point functions, as in generalized free field theory.
  • In $d=2$ the Appell function factorizes into ordinary hypergeometric functions, reproducing the holomorphic factorization of the position-space correlator.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The analyticity of the momentum-space OPE coefficient could serve as a defining condition for bootstrapping higher-point Lorentzian momentum-space correlators without explicit Fourier transforms; the paper only demonstrates the single-term 3-point case.
  • The unresolved partially time-ordered function with both momenta time-like suggests that OPE boundary data are incomplete there; imposing the known generalized-free-field factorization might select the missing term.
  • Because the result is analytic in the spacetime dimension $d$, the closed form can be continued to $d=3$ and $d=4$ and compared with inflationary or cosmological correlators, a connection the paper does not draw.
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.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper derives closed-form expressions for Lorentzian momentum-space 3-point Wightman functions in conformal field theory. Instead of direct Fourier transformation, the author uses conformal Ward identities and OPE boundary conditions. For three scalars, the main result is Eq. (37): the Wightman function equals a product of power laws times an Appell F4 double hypergeometric series, with Eq. (47) providing a continuation covering all kinematic regions. Section 3 extends the result to two scalars plus one traceless symmetric tensor of arbitrary spin, and Section 4 discusses time-ordered and partially time-ordered correlators. Appendix B checks the scalar formula against direct Fourier transforms in two OPE limits and reports numerical checks.

Significance. If correct, the result is a genuine improvement: it replaces a complicated Bessel-function integral for the scalar 3-point function with a simple hypergeometric expression, and it demonstrates that the momentum-space OPE, together with conformal Ward identities, can fix the full kinematic dependence without fitted parameters. The extension to traceless symmetric tensors and the discussion of time-ordered products are useful and mostly clearly presented. The analytic checks in Appendix B, the two-dimensional holomorphic factorization, and the generalized-free-field limits are well chosen and strengthen the paper. However, the selection of the unique solution and the continuation coefficients rests on an unproven analyticity assumption for the exact momentum-space OPE coefficient, and the time-like continuation region lacks direct verification in the manuscript.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. 2.2, Eq. (21); Sec. 2.4, Eqs. (35), (43), (44)] The uniqueness of the solution in Eq. (35) and the normalization of the time-like continuation coefficients in Eq. (44) both rely on the claim that the momentum-space OPE coefficient ~C_{12O}(p,q) is analytic in q around q=0. This is asserted from the formal expansion in Eq. (21), but the paper itself states in Sec. 2.2 that this definition is "purely formal so far" and that convergence is an open problem. The exact Fourier transform of the OPE coefficient could contain non-analytic or non-perturbative corrections in q; if so, the light-cone asymptotics in Eq. (29) and the cancellation of non-analytic terms near p_f -> 0 in Eq. (43) receive uncontrolled contributions. This is load-bearing because it determines both which of the four Ward-identity solutions is physical and the value of the continuation coefficients. I request either a proof of the needed analyticity at the level of the exact Fourier transform, or a direct numerical check of Eqs. (41)/(47) against the integral in Eq. (108) for time-like p0 with representative dimensions and a quantified agreement.
  2. [Appendix B, Eqs. (108), (113), (119), (127)] The analytic checks in Appendix B cover the simultaneous light-cone limit with space-like p0 and the pf -> 0 OPE limit, but no analytic check is shown for the time-like-p0 branch where Eq. (44) is essential. The text says that numerical checks were performed, but gives no comparison data, parameter ranges, or tolerances, so the continuation region is effectively unverified in the manuscript. This matters because the singular point p0^2 = 0 and the cancellation in Eq. (43) are exactly where the analyticity assumption is used. Please extend Appendix B with explicit numerical comparisons for p0^2 < 0, for example by evaluating Eq. (113) on a scan over p_f^2/p_i^2 and scaling dimensions and comparing with Eq. (47).
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Sec. 4.1] The abstract says that time-ordered and partially time-ordered products are constructed, but Sec. 4.1 explicitly leaves the case of time-like p1 and p2 as an open problem. Please reword the abstract and the discussion in Sec. 4.1 to state precisely which configurations are constructed.
  2. [Sec. 3.1] The sentence "The only type of spin representations allowed by conformal symmetry are are traceless symmetric tensors" contains a duplicated "are" and should be corrected.
  3. [Appendix A, first sentence] The text says that there are d(d+1)/2 generators of SO(d,2), but SO(d,2) has (d+2)(d+1)/2 generators; this appears to be a typo and should be fixed.
  4. [Eq. (47)] It would help the reader to state explicitly the branch or i-epsilon prescription used for each power of p^2 in the three-term continuation formula, since the reality of the Wightman function and the branch structure at p0^2 = 0 are otherwise hard to verify.
  5. [Appendix B] The numerical comparison is described only verbally; a figure or table with representative momenta, scaling dimensions, and relative errors would make the claimed verification reproducible and would substantially strengthen confidence in the result.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the Appell F4 closed form is derived from Ward identities plus OPE boundary conditions, with no fitted parameters and no load-bearing self-citation.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained rather than circular. The Poincare- and scale-covariant ansatz (15) is combined with the special-conformal Ward identities (32), whose general solution is a four-parameter space of Appell F4 combinations (35). The Lorentzian OPE limits (22)-(28) supply boundary conditions that select the single consistent solution and fix its overall coefficient through eqs. (24), (44)-(46). This is a genuine constraint-and-selection problem: the OPE limits provide only asymptotic power behavior, not the full double hypergeometric function, so the final result is not equivalent to its inputs by construction. No parameter is fitted to the target 3-point function; the normalization is the physical OPE coefficient lambda, which is external input. The analytic continuation to time-like p0 in section 2.4 is fixed by demanding cancellation of non-analytic terms in the pf -> 0 OPE limit, and the resulting expression is checked against direct Fourier transforms in appendix B. The paper explicitly notes that the momentum-space OPE is 'purely formal so far' and that its convergence in higher dimensions 'remains open'; that is an admitted assumption and a correctness risk, but it is not a circular reduction, because the assumed OPE boundary conditions do not already contain the claimed closed-form result. Self-citations such as refs. [42], [44], and [64] appear in contextual remarks or for standard two-point functions and known formalism, but the central claim does not reduce to any of them. No circular step of any of the enumerated kinds can be quoted, so the appropriate finding is no significant circularity.

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

No free parameters are fitted: the only undetermined number is the OPE coefficient lambda, which is standard CFT data and not fixed by the symmetry derivation. The central derivation relies on standard conformal machinery plus one unproved formal OPE analyticity assumption, and no new physical entities are introduced.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The Lorentzian OPE can be applied in momentum space to a 3-point Wightman function and the coefficient ~C(p,q) is analytic in q around q=0.
    Invoked in Sec. 2.2, eqs. (19)-(23), and used in Sec. 2.4 to cancel non-analytic terms at eqs. (40)-(44). The paper notes OPE convergence is only known in a distributional sense and does not prove this analyticity.
  • standard math The special conformal Ward identity (31) applies to momentum-space operators and its four Appell F4 solutions exhaust the solution space.
    Used in Sec. 2.3; the F4 system is a standard result from the DLMF and the solution counting follows from the differential equations for Appell F4.
  • domain assumption Wightman functions are analytic in scaling dimensions, so the OPE-selected solution extends through the special integer dimensions Delta = d/2 + n.
    Invoked after eq. (37) with a citation to [22]; without this analyticity the OPE limit does not unambiguously select one of the four Ward identity solutions at those integer dimensions.
  • domain assumption Unitarity bounds Delta >= (d-2)/2 and the standard positivity structure of momentum eigenstates hold.
    Used in Sec. 2.1 for the support conditions Theta(-p_f)Theta(p_i) and in Appendix B for the convergence of the direct Fourier transform integral.
  • domain assumption For the spin case, the ansatz (56) with l+1 polarization functions spans all Poincare and scale invariants, and the recursion (59) from the transverse Ward identity is complete.
    This is the load-bearing structure of the arbitrary-spin extension in Secs. 3.1-3.2; the paper does not give a full proof of completeness for mixed polarization structures.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Conformal 3-point functions and the Lorentzian OPE in momentum space." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BL5AETGX

@misc{pith2026190900878,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Conformal 3-point functions and the Lorentzian OPE in momentum space},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BL5AETGX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1909.00878}
}
abstract

In conformal field theory in Minkowski momentum space, the 3-point correlation functions of local operators are completely fixed by symmetry. Using Ward identities together with the existence of a Lorentzian operator product expansion (OPE), we show that the Wightman function of three scalar operators is a double hypergeometric series of the Appell $F_4$ type. We extend this simple closed-form expression to the case of two scalar operators and one traceless symmetric tensor with arbitrary spin. Time-ordered and partially-time-ordered products are constructed in a similar fashion and their relation with the Wightman function is discussed.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1909.00878 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Two examples of momentum configurations for the Wightma [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Examples of momentum configurations in the limits (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Examples of momentum configurations for the partially-tim [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Geometry of Kinematic Flow

    hep-th 2025-04 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    The wavefunction coefficients of conformally coupled scalars in power-law cosmologies obey differential equations whose basis functions can be arranged on hypercubes and zonotopes, with a single merger rule generating...

  2. Effective dynamics of open 2D CFTs

    hep-th 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    The momentum-space thermal four-point response function of scalar primaries in an arbitrary 2D CFT is expressed as an infinite sum over global conformal blocks of Meijer G-functions.

  3. An Ode to the Penrose and Witten transforms in Twistor space for 3D CFT

    hep-th 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    The authors show that the infinity twistor must be added to twistor-space invariants to describe general primary operators in 3D CFTs, and they derive the corresponding Penrose, Witten, and super-Penrose transforms.

  4. Lectures on the Spinor and Twistor Formalism in 3D Conformal Field Theory

    hep-th 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 2.0 of 10

    Lecture notes recapping off-shell spinor helicity, twistor, and super-twistor methods for 3d CFT correlators, with 55 exercises and no substantial new research result.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Conformal symmetry of critical fluctuations,

    A. M. Polyakov, “Conformal symmetry of critical fluctuations,” JETP Lett. 12 (1970) 381–383. [Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.12,538(1970)]

  2. [2]

    Conformal symmetry and three-point functio ns,

    E. J. Schreier, “Conformal symmetry and three-point functio ns,” Phys. Rev. D3 (1971) 980–988

  3. [3]

    Implications of conformal invarian ce in field theories for general dimensions,

    H. Osborn and A. C. Petkou, “Implications of conformal invarian ce in field theories for general dimensions,” Annals Phys. 231 (1994) 311–362 , arXiv:hep-th/9307010 [hep-th]

  4. [4]

    Conserved currents and the en ergy momentum tensor in conformally invariant theories for general dimensions,

    J. Erdmenger and H. Osborn, “Conserved currents and the en ergy momentum tensor in conformally invariant theories for general dimensions,” Nucl. Phys. B483 (1997) 431–474 , arXiv:hep-th/9605009 [hep-th]

  5. [5]

    A Note on CFT Correlators in Th ree Dimensions,

    S. Giombi, S. Prakash, and X. Yin, “A Note on CFT Correlators in Th ree Dimensions,” JHEP 07 (2013) 105 , arXiv:1104.4317 [hep-th]

  6. [6]

    Spinnin g Conformal Correlators,

    M. S. Costa, J. Penedones, D. Poland, and S. Rychkov, “Spinnin g Conformal Correlators,” JHEP 11 (2011) 071 , arXiv:1107.3554 [hep-th]

  7. [7]

    Constraining Conformal Field Th eories with A Higher Spin Symmetry,

    J. Maldacena and A. Zhiboedov, “Constraining Conformal Field Th eories with A Higher Spin Symmetry,” J. Phys. A46 (2013) 214011 , arXiv:1112.1016 [hep-th]

  8. [8]

    A note on three-point functions of conserved c urrents,

    A. Zhiboedov, “A note on three-point functions of conserved c urrents,” arXiv:1206.6370 [hep-th]

Show all 68 references
  1. [9]

    General Three-Point Functions in 4D CFT,

    E. Elkhidir, D. Karateev, and M. Serone, “General Three-Point Functions in 4D CFT,” JHEP 01 (2015) 133 , arXiv:1412.1796 [hep-th]

  2. [10]

    Conformal two-point c orrelation functions from the operator product expansion,

    J.-F. Fortin, V. Prilepina, and W. Skiba, “Conformal two-point c orrelation functions from the operator product expansion,” JHEP 04 (2020) 114 , arXiv:1906.12349 [hep-th]

  3. [11]

    Conformal Three-Poin t Correlation Functions from the Operator Product Expansion,

    J.-F. Fortin, V. Prilepina, and W. Skiba, “Conformal Three-Poin t Correlation Functions from the Operator Product Expansion,” arXiv:1907.08599 [hep-th]

  4. [12]

    Weight Shif ting Operators and Conformal Blocks,

    D. Karateev, P. Kravchuk, and D. Simmons-Duffin, “Weight Shif ting Operators and Conformal Blocks,” JHEP 02 (2018) 081 , arXiv:1706.07813 [hep-th]

  5. [13]

    Harmonic A nalysis and Mean Field Theory,

    D. Karateev, P. Kravchuk, and D. Simmons-Duffin, “Harmonic A nalysis and Mean Field Theory,” JHEP 10 (2019) 217 , arXiv:1809.05111 [hep-th]

  6. [14]

    OPE C onvergence in Conformal Field Theory,

    D. Pappadopulo, S. Rychkov, J. Espin, and R. Rattazzi, “OPE C onvergence in Conformal Field Theory,” Phys. Rev. D86 (2012) 105043 , arXiv:1208.6449 [hep-th]

  7. [15]

    Radial Coordinates for Conf ormal Blocks,

    M. Hogervorst and S. Rychkov, “Radial Coordinates for Conf ormal Blocks,” Phys. Rev. D87 (2013) 106004 , arXiv:1303.1111 [hep-th] . 31

  8. [16]

    Remarks on the Convergence Pr operties of the Conformal Block Expansion,

    S. Rychkov and P. Yvernay, “Remarks on the Convergence Pr operties of the Conformal Block Expansion,” Phys. Lett. B753 (2016) 682–686 , arXiv:1510.08486 [hep-th]

  9. [17]

    Analytic Euclidean Boot strap,

    B. Mukhametzhanov and A. Zhiboedov, “Analytic Euclidean Boot strap,” JHEP 10 (2019) 270 , arXiv:1808.03212 [hep-th]

  10. [18]

    Bounding sc alar operator dimensions in 4D CFT,

    R. Rattazzi, V. S. Rychkov, E. Tonni, and A. Vichi, “Bounding sc alar operator dimensions in 4D CFT,” JHEP 12 (2008) 031 , arXiv:0807.0004 [hep-th]

  11. [19]

    Rychkov, EPFL Lectures on Conformal Field Theory in D ≥ 3 Dimensions

    S. Rychkov, EPFL Lectures on Conformal Field Theory in D ≥ 3 Dimensions . SpringerBriefs in Physics, 2016. arXiv:1601.05000 [hep-th]

  12. [20]

    The Conformal Bootstrap,

    D. Simmons-Duffin, “The Conformal Bootstrap,” in Proceedings, Theoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics: N ew Frontiers in Fields and Strings (TASI 2015): Boulder, CO, USA, June 1-26, 2015 , pp. 1–74. 2017. arXiv:1602.07982 [hep-th]

  13. [21]

    The Conformal Bootstra p: Theory, Numerical Techniques, and Applications,

    D. Poland, S. Rychkov, and A. Vichi, “The Conformal Bootstra p: Theory, Numerical Techniques, and Applications,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 91 no. 1, (2019) 15002 , arXiv:1805.04405 [hep-th] . [Rev. Mod. Phys.91,015002(2019)]

  14. [22]

    Lorentzian CFT 3-point functio ns in momentum space,

    T. Bautista and H. Godazgar, “Lorentzian CFT 3-point functio ns in momentum space,” JHEP 01 (2020) 142 , arXiv:1908.04733 [hep-th]

  15. [23]

    Solving the Conformal Constraints for Scalar Operators in Momentum Space and the Evalu ation of Feynman’s Master Integrals,

    C. Coriano, L. Delle Rose, E. Mottola, and M. Serino, “Solving the Conformal Constraints for Scalar Operators in Momentum Space and the Evalu ation of Feynman’s Master Integrals,” JHEP 07 (2013) 011 , arXiv:1304.6944 [hep-th]

  16. [24]

    Implications of co nformal invariance in momentum space,

    A. Bzowski, P. McFadden, and K. Skenderis, “Implications of co nformal invariance in momentum space,” JHEP 03 (2014) 111 , arXiv:1304.7760 [hep-th]

  17. [25]

    Scalar 3-point fu nctions in CFT: renormalisation, beta functions and anomalies,

    A. Bzowski, P. McFadden, and K. Skenderis, “Scalar 3-point fu nctions in CFT: renormalisation, beta functions and anomalies,” JHEP 03 (2016) 066 , arXiv:1510.08442 [hep-th]

  18. [26]

    TTT in CFT: Trace Iden tities and the Conformal Anomaly Effective Action,

    C. Coriano, M. M. Maglio, and E. Mottola, “TTT in CFT: Trace Iden tities and the Conformal Anomaly Effective Action,” Nucl. Phys. B942 (2019) 303–328 , arXiv:1703.08860 [hep-th]

  19. [27]

    Renormalised 3-p oint functions of stress tensors and conserved currents in CFT,

    A. Bzowski, P. McFadden, and K. Skenderis, “Renormalised 3-p oint functions of stress tensors and conserved currents in CFT,” JHEP 11 (2018) 153 , arXiv:1711.09105 [hep-th]

  20. [28]

    Momentum space approach to crossing symmetric CFT correlators,

    H. Isono, T. Noumi, and G. Shiu, “Momentum space approach to crossing symmetric CFT correlators,” JHEP 07 (2018) 136 , arXiv:1805.11107 [hep-th]

  21. [29]

    Renormalised CFT 3-point functions of scalars, currents and stress tensors,

    A. Bzowski, P. McFadden, and K. Skenderis, “Renormalised CFT 3-point functions of scalars, currents and stress tensors,” JHEP 11 (2018) 159 , arXiv:1805.12100 [hep-th] . 32

  22. [30]

    The general 3-graviton vertex ( T T T) of conformal field theories in momentum space in d = 4,

    C. Corian` o and M. M. Maglio, “The general 3-graviton vertex ( T T T) of conformal field theories in momentum space in d = 4,” Nucl. Phys. B937 (2018) 56–134 , arXiv:1808.10221 [hep-th]

  23. [31]

    Momentum space confor mal three-point functions of conserved currents and a general spinning operato r,

    H. Isono, T. Noumi, and T. Takeuchi, “Momentum space confor mal three-point functions of conserved currents and a general spinning operato r,” JHEP 05 (2019) 057 , arXiv:1903.01110 [hep-th]

  24. [32]

    Momentum space approach to crossing symmetric CFT correlators. Part II. General spacetime dimension ,

    H. Isono, T. Noumi, and G. Shiu, “Momentum space approach to crossing symmetric CFT correlators. Part II. General spacetime dimension ,” JHEP 10 (2019) 183 , arXiv:1908.04572 [hep-th]

  25. [33]

    On graviton non-Gaussianit ies during inflation,

    J. M. Maldacena and G. L. Pimentel, “On graviton non-Gaussianit ies during inflation,” JHEP 09 (2011) 045 , arXiv:1104.2846 [hep-th]

  26. [34]

    Conformal consistency relations for single-field inflation,

    P. Creminelli, J. Nore˜ na, and M. Simonovi´ c, “Conformal consistency relations for single-field inflation,” JCAP 1207 (2012) 052 , arXiv:1203.4595 [hep-th]

  27. [35]

    Constraints from Conf ormal Symmetry on the Three Point Scalar Correlator in Inflation,

    N. Kundu, A. Shukla, and S. P. Trivedi, “Constraints from Conf ormal Symmetry on the Three Point Scalar Correlator in Inflation,” JHEP 04 (2015) 061 , arXiv:1410.2606 [hep-th]

  28. [36]

    Cosmological Collider Physic s,

    N. Arkani-Hamed and J. Maldacena, “Cosmological Collider Physic s,” arXiv:1503.08043 [hep-th]

  29. [37]

    Ward Identities for Sca le and Special Conformal Transformations in Inflation,

    N. Kundu, A. Shukla, and S. P. Trivedi, “Ward Identities for Sca le and Special Conformal Transformations in Inflation,” JHEP 01 (2016) 046 , arXiv:1507.06017 [hep-th]

  30. [38]

    Symmetry constraints in inflation, α-vacua, and the three point function,

    A. Shukla, S. P. Trivedi, and V. Vishal, “Symmetry constraints in inflation, α-vacua, and the three point function,” JHEP 12 (2016) 102 , arXiv:1607.08636 [hep-th]

  31. [39]

    The Cosmological Bootstrap: Inflationary Correlators from Symmetries and Singula rities,

    N. Arkani-Hamed, D. Baumann, H. Lee, and G. L. Pimentel, “The Cosmological Bootstrap: Inflationary Correlators from Symmetries and Singula rities,” arXiv:1811.00024 [hep-th]

  32. [40]

    A Mellin Space Approach to Cosmological Correlators ,

    C. Sleight, “A Mellin Space Approach to Cosmological Correlators ,” JHEP 01 (2020) 090 , arXiv:1906.12302 [hep-th]

  33. [41]

    Bootstrapping Inflationary Corre lators in Mellin Space,

    C. Sleight and M. Taronna, “Bootstrapping Inflationary Corre lators in Mellin Space,” JHEP 02 (2020) 098 , arXiv:1907.01143 [hep-th]

  34. [42]

    Scale Anomalies, States, and Ra tes in Conformal Field Theory,

    M. Gillioz, X. Lu, and M. A. Luty, “Scale Anomalies, States, and Ra tes in Conformal Field Theory,” JHEP 04 (2017) 171 , arXiv:1612.07800 [hep-th]

  35. [43]

    Graviton Scattering and a Sum R ule for the c Anomaly in 4D CFT,

    M. Gillioz, X. Lu, and M. A. Luty, “Graviton Scattering and a Sum R ule for the c Anomaly in 4D CFT,” JHEP 09 (2018) 025 , arXiv:1801.05807 [hep-th]

  36. [44]

    Momentum-space conformal blocks on the light cone,

    M. Gillioz, “Momentum-space conformal blocks on the light cone,” JHEP 10 (2018) 125 , arXiv:1807.07003 [hep-th] . 33

  37. [45]

    From correlation functions to event shapes,

    A. V. Belitsky, S. Hohenegger, G. P. Korchemsky, E. Sokatch ev, and A. Zhiboedov, “From correlation functions to event shapes,” Nucl. Phys. B884 (2014) 305–343 , arXiv:1309.0769 [hep-th]

  38. [46]

    Light-ray operators in co nformal field theory,

    P. Kravchuk and D. Simmons-Duffin, “Light-ray operators in co nformal field theory,” JHEP 11 (2018) 102 , arXiv:1805.00098 [hep-th] . [,236(2018)]

  39. [47]

    Shocks, Superconvergence, and a Stringy Equivalence Principle,

    M. Kologlu, P. Kravchuk, D. Simmons-Duffin, and A. Zhiboedov, “ Shocks, Superconvergence, and a Stringy Equivalence Principle,” arXiv:1904.05905 [hep-th]

  40. [48]

    The light-ray OPE and conformal colliders,

    M. Kologlu, P. Kravchuk, D. Simmons-Duffin, and A. Zhiboedov, “ The light-ray OPE and conformal colliders,” arXiv:1905.01311 [hep-th]

  41. [49]

    Conformal collider physics: En ergy and charge correlations,

    D. M. Hofman and J. Maldacena, “Conformal collider physics: En ergy and charge correlations,” JHEP 05 (2008) 012 , arXiv:0803.1467 [hep-th]

  42. [50]

    Bounds on OPE Co efficients from Interference Effects in the Conformal Collider,

    C. Cordova, J. Maldacena, and G. J. Turiaci, “Bounds on OPE Co efficients from Interference Effects in the Conformal Collider,” JHEP 11 (2017) 032 , arXiv:1710.03199 [hep-th]

  43. [51]

    Universal Bounds on Operator Dimens ions from the Average Null Energy Condition,

    C. Cordova and K. Diab, “Universal Bounds on Operator Dimens ions from the Average Null Energy Condition,” JHEP 02 (2018) 131 , arXiv:1712.01089 [hep-th]

  44. [52]

    Constraints o n parity violating conformal field theories in d = 3,

    S. D. Chowdhury, J. R. David, and S. Prakash, “Constraints o n parity violating conformal field theories in d = 3,” JHEP 11 (2017) 171 , arXiv:1707.03007 [hep-th]

  45. [53]

    Shoc kwaves from the Operator Product Expansion,

    N. Afkhami-Jeddi, T. Hartman, S. Kundu, and A. Tajdini, “Shoc kwaves from the Operator Product Expansion,” JHEP 03 (2019) 201 , arXiv:1709.03597 [hep-th]

  46. [54]

    A Conformal Collide r for Holographic CFTs,

    N. Afkhami-Jeddi, S. Kundu, and A. Tajdini, “A Conformal Collide r for Holographic CFTs,” JHEP 10 (2018) 156 , arXiv:1805.07393 [hep-th]

  47. [55]

    Higher Spin ANEC and the Space of CFTs,

    D. Meltzer, “Higher Spin ANEC and the Space of CFTs,” JHEP 07 (2019) 001 , arXiv:1811.01913 [hep-th]

  48. [56]

    Einstein gravity from AN EC correlators,

    A. Belin, D. M. Hofman, and G. Mathys, “Einstein gravity from AN EC correlators,” JHEP 08 (2019) 032 , arXiv:1904.05892 [hep-th]

  49. [57]

    Higher Derivative Gravity, Causality and Positivit y of Energy in a UV complete QFT,

    D. M. Hofman, “Higher Derivative Gravity, Causality and Positivit y of Energy in a UV complete QFT,” Nucl. Phys. B823 (2009) 174–194 , arXiv:0907.1625 [hep-th]

  50. [58]

    Averaged Null Energy C ondition from Causality,

    T. Hartman, S. Kundu, and A. Tajdini, “Averaged Null Energy C ondition from Causality,” JHEP 07 (2017) 066 , arXiv:1610.05308 [hep-th]

  51. [59]

    Light-ray Operators and the BM S Algebra,

    C. C´ ordova and S.-H. Shao, “Light-ray Operators and the BM S Algebra,” Phys. Rev. D98 no. 12, (2018) 125015 , arXiv:1810.05706 [hep-th] . 34

  52. [60]

    A Conformal Tru ncation Framework for Infinite-Volume Dynamics,

    E. Katz, Z. U. Khandker, and M. T. Walters, “A Conformal Tru ncation Framework for Infinite-Volume Dynamics,” JHEP 07 (2016) 140 , arXiv:1604.01766 [hep-th]

  53. [61]

    Lightcone effective Hamiltonians and RG flows,

    A. L. Fitzpatrick, J. Kaplan, E. Katz, L. G. Vitale, and M. T. Walt ers, “Lightcone effective Hamiltonians and RG flows,” JHEP 08 (2018) 120 , arXiv:1803.10793 [hep-th]

  54. [62]

    Recursion relation for general 3d blocks,

    R. S. Erramilli, L. V. Iliesiu, and P. Kravchuk, “Recursion relation for general 3d blocks,” JHEP 12 (2019) 116 , arXiv:1907.11247 [hep-th]

  55. [63]

    Convergence of Operator Product Expansions on t he Vacuum in Conformal Invariant Quantum Field Theory,

    G. Mack, “Convergence of Operator Product Expansions on t he Vacuum in Conformal Invariant Quantum Field Theory,” Commun. Math. Phys. 53 (1977) 155

  56. [64]

    Convergent Mo mentum-Space OPE and Bootstrap Equations in Conformal Field Theory,

    M. Gillioz, X. Lu, M. A. Luty, and G. Mikaberidze, “Convergent Mo mentum-Space OPE and Bootstrap Equations in Conformal Field Theory,” JHEP 03 (2020) 102 , arXiv:1912.05550 [hep-th]

  57. [65]

    NIST Digital Library of Mathematical Functions

    “ NIST Digital Library of Mathematical Functions .” Http://dlmf.nist.gov/, release 1.0.23 of 2019-06-15. http://dlmf.nist.gov/. F. W. J. Olver, A. B. Olde Daalhuis, D. W. Lozier, B. I. Schneider, R. F. Boisvert, C. W. Clark, B. R. Miller and B. V. Saunders, eds

  58. [66]

    Projectors, Shadows, and Conformal Blo cks,

    D. Simmons-Duffin, “Projectors, Shadows, and Conformal Blo cks,” JHEP 04 (2014) 146 , arXiv:1204.3894 [hep-th]

  59. [67]

    Conformal Partial Waves: Furthe r Mathematical Results,

    F. A. Dolan and H. Osborn, “Conformal Partial Waves: Furthe r Mathematical Results,” arXiv:1108.6194 [hep-th]

  60. [68]

    Pro jectors and seed conformal blocks for traceless mixed-symmetry tensors,

    M. S. Costa, T. Hansen, J. Penedones, and E. Trevisani, “Pro jectors and seed conformal blocks for traceless mixed-symmetry tensors,” JHEP 07 (2016) 018 , arXiv:1603.05551 [hep-th] . 35

Pith tools

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